The Whitehall Mystery

[Abby Normal]

I agree, I don't think there is any harm in exploring the possibilities and see where it leads. After all we now have two lots of red tape where we once had a rose tattoo!
Elizabeth's genitals were targeted in the same way Mary Jane Kelly's were. The description of the damage in that area is so similar.

Hi Debra
Re the red tape:-have you had any luck with this?
I looked it up and not surprisingly the term "red tape" we use today meaning long processes/paperwork etc. comes from 1800's when government documents and lawyers briefs were bound by red tape. But it looks like the meaning of "tape" back then was the same as string or ribbon.

Do we know in the torso case what kind of tape they meant? string/ribbon or sticky tape?
Not sure if the sticky kind of tape had been invented by then.

However, if it had then I would imagine that possibly red tape was used in the butcher trade? or maybe medical field?

[Debra A]

Hi Debra
Re the red tape:-have you had any luck with this?
I looked it up and not surprisingly the term "red tape" we use today meaning long processes/paperwork etc. comes from 1800's when government documents and lawyers briefs were bound by red tape. But it looks like the meaning of "tape" back then was the same as string or ribbon.

Do we know in the torso case what kind of tape they meant? string/ribbon or sticky tape?
Not sure if the sticky kind of tape had been invented by then.

However, if it had then I would imagine that possibly red tape was used in the butcher trade? or maybe medical field?

Hi Abby

There was cotton tape which came in a variety of colours, red included, and was used for things like fabric edge bindings on garments and soft furnishings like curtains (coincidentally, the Whitehall torso and Elizabeth Jackson's remains were parceled up with Venetian blind cord)
The John Gill researcher who shared the post mortem copy with me originally mentioned something about flour sacks- I don't know if flour sacks might have been sewn closed with some form of tape? Perhaps cotton in that case too.

I don't think they had sticky tape yet, but not certain of that.

So we might be looking for an interior designer with delusions he was a surgeon!

[RockySullivan]

[QUOTE=John Wheat;343416]

So you think it's likely two unrelated killers targeted poor women who resorted to prostitution and were sleeping roughing and killed them and removed uterus. Look at the similarities between the way Kelly and Jackson were cut up. The torso was dumped in the railway arch Schwartz was chased to and lipski was written there...is that a coincidence? Why was a newspaper from the date the Tabram inquest verdict appeared in print placed with the whitehall torso? There certainly ARE coincidences with the two cases but the most significant is again it's highly unlikely there were two serial killers operating in London who cut up women and removed their uterus. How many times Jack removed it is irrelevant...the point is he did.[/QUOTE

To Rocky

A few coincidences mean nothing. There is no evidence and not even any logic that Jack and the Torso Killer were one and the same.

Cheers John

Well then John explain to me why the torso killer chose to place a newspaper clipping from the date tabram's inquest verdict appeared in print?

Could you also explain why the torso killer chose to place the pinchin torso under the railway arch where Schwartz was chased by pipeman, had lipski written there and was on the anniversary of chapmans murder?

Explain why they both took the uterus....and no I don't believe the ripper accidentally took the uterus that's incredulous.

[RockySullivan]

Hi Rocky,

In the Torso cases the uterus may have been accidentally lost as the killer transported and disposed of the body. In respect of JtR, we cannot know that he specifically targeted the uterus: considering he was operating with very little light, and may not have had anatomical knowledge, he could have been after a different organ and removed the uterus by mistake. Or he could have just been intent on securing a trophy, so that the removal of the uterus was incidental, I.e. it would as just luck that that was the organ he found and removed. In fact, in respect of MJK, there didn't seem to be any targeting of specific organs: the I killer seemed to have just plucked them out on a completely wanton fashion.

John, the ripper worked quickly in the dark...he knew how to remove the uterus...in my opinion it was calculated. Was the uterus accidents removed by the torso killer? No I think it was purposeful like the ripper. After all he very calculatedly dismembered entire bodies...I think he was aware of where all the organs ended up.

[jerryd]

Hi Abby

There was cotton tape which came in a variety of colours, red included, and was used for things like fabric edge bindings on garments and soft furnishings like curtains (coincidentally, the Whitehall torso and Elizabeth Jackson's remains were parceled up with Venetian blind cord)
The John Gill researcher who shared the post mortem copy with me originally mentioned something about flour sacks- I don't know if flour sacks might have been sewn closed with some form of tape? Perhaps cotton in that case too.

I don't think they had sticky tape yet, but not certain of that.

So we might be looking for an interior designer with delusions he was a surgeon!

Thanks Debra,

I was thinking bookbinding cloth tape? Apparently pressure sensitive surgical tape was developed in 1845 as well.

[RockySullivan]

Wasn't there a torso case where the parcel was tied with red string?

[John G]

[QUOTE=RockySullivan;343457]

Well then John explain to me why the torso killer chose to place a newspaper clipping from the date tabram's inquest verdict appeared in print?

Could you also explain why the torso killer chose to place the pinchin torso under the railway arch where Schwartz was chased by pipeman, had lipski written there and was on the anniversary of chapmans murder?

Explain why they both took the uterus....and no I don't believe the ripper accidentally took the uterus that's incredulous.

Hi Rocky,

Considering that JtR was operating in very poor lightening conditions, and may have had no anatomical knowledge, it cannot possibly be concluded, with any remote degree of certainty, that he specifically targeted the uterus: see, for example, the opinion of Dr Biggs, the forensic pathologist engaged by Trevor Marriott ( Marriott, 2013).

The fact is it makes no sense to link the Whitechapel murders with the Torso victims. In fact, in my opinion that simply leads to absurd conclusions. Thus, you would have a killer who apparently starts off as a commuter killer, targeting victims over a wide area, dismembering bodies in a secure location, and then dumping the remains. He then decides, in 1888, to opt for a duel approach: he continues with his initially MO/ signature(Jackson/Whitehall), whilst concurrently adapting a completely different signature/ MO in respect of the Whitechapel murders: for these crimes he targets only victims in the Whitechapel area, murders them in public places, makes no attempt at dismemberment, and doesn't use dump sites for disposal! Finally, in 1889 he abandons this totally confusing, and inexplicable duel strategy, and returns to his original MO/signature: Pinchin Street.

I'm sorry but that makes no sense whatsoever. We're clearly dealing with two completely different perpetrators.

[Trevor Marriott]

[QUOTE=John G;343484]

I'm sorry but that makes no sense whatsoever. We're clearly dealing with two completely different perpetrators.

Hi John
But there is no conclusive evidence to point to a serial killer being responsible for the Torsos.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[RockySullivan]

[QUOTE=John G;343484]

Hi Rocky,

Considering that JtR was operating in very poor lightening conditions, and may have had no anatomical knowledge, it cannot possibly be concluded, with any remote degree of certainty, that he specifically targeted the uterus: see, for example, the opinion of Dr Biggs, the forensic pathologist engaged by Trevor Marriott ( Marriott, 2013).

The fact is it makes no sense to link the Whitechapel murders with the Torso victims. In fact, in my opinion that simply leads to absurd conclusions. Thus, you would have a killer who apparently starts off as a commuter killer, targeting victims over a wide area, dismembering bodies in a secure location, and then dumping the remains. He then decides, in 1888, to opt for a duel approach: he continues with his initially MO/ signature(Jackson/Whitehall), whilst concurrently adapting a completely different signature/ MO in respect of the Whitechapel murders: for these crimes he targets only victims in the Whitechapel area, murders them in public places, makes no attempt at dismemberment, and doesn't use dump sites for disposal! Finally, in 1889 he abandons this totally confusing, and inexplicable duel strategy, and returns to his original MO/signature: Pinchin Street.

I'm sorry but that makes no sense whatsoever. We're clearly dealing with two completely different perpetrators.

There are a number of reasons why the killer might switch from dismembering to street attacks. And if the torso killer was looking for a thrill/wanted to collect a trophies the streets and alleys of whitechapel were a perfect choice clearly. It makes no sense whatsoever to assume two serial killers removing same body organs, similar victimology, the incredible similarity between the ripper attacks and the torso dumpings. It doesn't make sense?

I see an awful lot of connections and not one single fact that says they are not related.

[RockySullivan]

[QUOTE=Trevor Marriott;343495]

Hi John
But there is no conclusive evidence to point to a serial killer being responsible for the Torsos.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Well trevor there may be no conclusive evidence but what we do know is that elizabeth Jackson was alive sleeping on the embankment (where other parts turned up correct?) and then she ends up dismembered. She was either murdered or she died during a botched abortion. The disposal of Jackson's body shares many similarities with the the the torso disposals so it certainly appears to be the work of a serial torso dumper. Now if that torso dumper was only dumping botched abortions then why hide the whitehall torso in a vault and bury the limbs for weeks and weeks. Again it certainly appears the two workers who used the portion of the vault where the body was decaying must have known something....were they abortionist? Unlikely so was one of the men's wife an abortionist? Or were they murderers? There is not a huge list of possibilities here
Obviously there is no proof these workers were connected to the torso...but it has all the markings of an inside job in my opinion.

[Trevor Marriott]

[QUOTE=RockySullivan;343501]

There is not a huge list of possibilities here

The clue as to what happened to Jackson is to be found in her rear end !

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[John G]

[QUOTE=RockySullivan;343500]

There are a number of reasons why the killer might switch from dismembering to street attacks. And if the torso killer was looking for a thrill/wanted to collect a trophies the streets and alleys of whitechapel were a perfect choice clearly. It makes no sense whatsoever to assume two serial killers removing same body organs, similar victimology, the incredible similarity between the ripper attacks and the torso dumpings. It doesn't make sense?

I see an awful lot of connections and not one single fact that says they are not related.

There aren't any definite connections as far as I can see. We do not know if the victimology was the same because only one torso victim was identified. We do not know if the loss of body parts in the torso cases was simply accidental; we do not know that JtR purposefully specifically targeted any particular body parts. There are major differences between the torso crimes and the Whitechapel murders; in fact, has Trevor pointed out, we do not even know if any of the torso victims were murdered, with the exception of Battersea.

[John G]

[QUOTE=Trevor Marriott;343495]

Hi John
But there is no conclusive evidence to point to a serial killer being responsible for the Torsos.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hi Trevor,

Yes, I agree. Without conclusive forensic evidence, i.e. DNA, connecting victims to a particular assailant is clearly no easy matter. I mean, who would have thought that Sutcliffe, who started off by targeting street prostitutes in red light districts, would have attacked a 14 year old school girl on a quiet country lane?

[John G]

[QUOTE=Trevor Marriott;343502]

The clue as to what happened to Jackson is to be found in her rear end !

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

This calls for a great deal of speculation! I think that a bigger clue is that she was sleeping rough on the embankment- fits in nicely with my theory of a serial killer operating from a boat!

[RockySullivan]

[QUOTE=Trevor Marriott;343502]

The clue as to what happened to Jackson is to be found in her rear end !

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I agree that the plugging is very significant especially when viewed in relation to the fetus in a pickle jar. But the fetus was determined by the doctor to not be Jackson's....so where does that leave us?