The Whitehall Mystery

[RockySullivan]

Yes, but two of the workman stated that the Torso parcel, found on the ledge, must have been their only a few days, I.e. during the weekend when they weren't work.

True but the parcel was said by the doctor to have been there for weeks. The walk was stained black from the torso decomposing against it. This is why the workers story doesn't make sense.

[Trevor Marriott]

The perpetrator clearly went to a great deal of trouble to dispose of the body, and was therefore clearly an organized offender. Thus, he dismembered the corpse and took steps to prevent the victim being identified, I.e. he retained the head. Why would such a person then be crazy enough to attempt to sell the organs, thus drawing attention to his nefarious activities?

This selling of organs has become blown up out of all proportions.

Let me put it back in the context I first mentioned it.

The topic of discussion was the missing vital organs from some of the torsos. I said that if the victims had died as a result of some back street procedure then the back st medico would need to get rid of the body and avoid any evidence of being linked to the death.

I merely suggested that had that have happened the medico in getting rid of the body by dismemberment could have possibly removed those vital organs and perhaps sold them on if that person had the right contacts.

Just one of a number of possibilities to consider when discussing how and when the victims died and what happened to the bodies and the missing body parts from some of them.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Abby Normal]

Hi Rocky
I think there's definitely similarities in the cases 87-89.

Thanks Debra!

FYI-Im Abby ; )

[John G]

This selling of organs has become blown up out of all proportions.

Let me put it back in the context I first mentioned it.

The topic of discussion was the missing vital organs from some of the torsos. I said that if the victims had died as a result of some back street procedure then the back st medico would need to get rid of the body and avoid any evidence of being linked to the death.

I merely suggested that had that have happened the medico in getting rid of the body by dismemberment could have possibly removed those vital organs and perhaps sold them on if that person had the right contacts.

Just one of a number of possibilities to consider when discussing how and when the victims died and what happened to the bodies and the missing body parts from some of them.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hello Trevor,

I certainly wouldn't rule out other possibilities. However, if some of the victims died as the result of some back street procedure it seems to me that it must have been carried out by some completely deluded individual, who didn't even have a rudimentary knowledge of what they were supposed to be doing. And that still doesn't explain some of the completely unnecessary risks that were taken when disposing of the body parts.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hello Trevor,

I certainly wouldn't rule out other possibilities. However, if some of the victims died as the result of some back street procedure it seems to me that it must have been carried out by some completely deluded individual, who didn't even have a rudimentary knowledge of what they were supposed to be doing.

But the facts speak for themselves, people did die in these circumstances, whether at the time of some operation, or as a result of going back having been poisoned from the initial operation, and when that happened the body would need to be removed for obvious reasons along with the identity of that person, hence the head removal.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Harry D]

I can't be bothered to scroll back to see if anyone addressed my original point to Trevor, but if these were botched abortions, why were some of the remains ditched in conspicuous locations? Why wouldn't the killer dump them all in the Thames?

[John G]

I can't be bothered to scroll back to see if anyone addressed my original point to Trevor, but if these were botched abortions, why were some of the remains ditched in conspicuous locations? Why wouldn't the killer dump them all in the Thames?

Hello Harry,

That's exactly my point. And, of course, with the Tottenham, Pinchin Street and Whitehall torsos the perpetrator took great risks when disposing of the body parts. To my mind, that makes no sense of the only motive was body disposal.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hello Harry,

That's exactly my point. And, of course, with the Tottenham, Pinchin Street and Whitehall torsos the perpetrator took great risks when disposing of the body parts. To my mind, that makes no sense of the only motive was body disposal.

Ah now we are agreed body disposal, but by whom and for what purpose?

Why would a killer go to those lengths to dispose of a body?

If he had not been seen committing the murder, or had not been seen with the victim prior to death what would he need to worry about? Simply leave the body in situ wherever that was. I think a street murder can be totally ruled out.

So that leaves a murder in a house or flat. If the victims abode again he could simply leave the body no need to even dismember it.

If his domain then you would have to be looking at all the subsequent body parts being found somewhere near to each other, which might sugest he lived near the thames. Unless he was bringing victims half way across London, the victims would have to be close to him.

So you can see why none of this fits in with a serial killer.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[John G]

But the facts speak for themselves, people did die in these circumstances, whether at the time of some operation, or as a result of going back having been poisoned from the initial operation, and when that happened the body would need to be removed for obvious reasons along with the identity of that person, hence the head removal.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hello Trevor,

Firstly that still doesn't explain the risks that were taken when disposing of the remains. Secondly, if the perpetrator was some deranged individual, carrying out medical procedures without the most rudimentary knowledge of such procedures, it would surely still be a case of murder. For instance, prior to the Homicide Act, 1957, the Felony Murder Rule would still be applicable. And under this rule you could be charged with murder if the underlying felony presented a foreseeable danger to life and the link between the felony and the death was not too remote.

[John G]

Ah now we are agreed body disposal, but by whom and for what purpose?

Why would a killer go to those lengths to dispose of a body?

If he had not been seen committing the murder, or had not been seen with the victim prior to death what would he need to worry about? Simply leave the body in situ wherever that was. I think a street murder can be totally ruled out.

So that leaves a murder in a house or flat. If the victims abode again he could simply leave the body no need to even dismember it.

If his domain then you would have to be looking at all the subsequent body parts being found somewhere near to each other, which might sugest he lived near the thames. Unless he was bringing victims half way across London, the victims would have to be close to him.

So you can see why none of this fits in with a serial killer.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

#

Hello Trevor,

Motive may be an issue. As I've suggested before it is possible that a serial killer was intending to taunt the police or other authorities. That may explain, for instance, the Whitehall Torso, left in the New Scotland Yard building; the Tottenham Torso, left in an area almost constantly patrolled by the police and next to a military drill hall; and the Pinchin Street Torso, possibly murdered on the anniversary of Annie Chapman's death, and possibly left by the same railway arches that Schwartz ran to. And then there's the word "Lipski" written in large chalk letters by some nearby railings.

I also believe that the perpetrator may have had a boat. A boat would clearly be an ideal place to dismember and store the bodies. It would explain the connection to the Thames: The Scotland Yard building was on the embankment and could be accessed via boat, thus avoiding the 9ft fence; several body parts were thrown in the Thames; Liz Jackson had been sleeping rough by the embankment.

[Debra A]

Thanks Debra!

FYI-Im Abby ; )

My apologies, Abby.

[jerryd]

I also believe that the perpetrator may have had a boat. A boat would clearly be an ideal place to dismember and store the bodies. It would explain the connection to the Thames: The Scotland Yard building was on the embankment and could be accessed via boat, thus avoiding the 9ft fence; several body parts were thrown in the Thames; Liz Jackson had been sleeping rough by the embankment.

Hi JG,

The boat is an interesting theory. You may also find this article in the Star of interest.

The Star
FRIDAY, 5 OCTOBER, 1888.

The theory that the victim of the Whitehall crime was a lady, or at any rate a person of good position, which has been asserted, is not now countenanced by the police. It is more likely she was an unfortunate or a servant. Dr. Neville adheres to the opinion that the hand showed indications of hard work. The skin was rough and hard. The finger nails were dirty. It is believed that the head had been cleanly cut from the body by a very sharp instrument, and that the victim was a dark-complexioned woman, presumed to be about 26 years of age, and in stature 5ft. 7in or 5ft. 8in. The site of the new police offices, where the National Opera House was to have been erected, faces the Embankment, and backs on Cannon-row. It is on the west side of the gardens of Whitehall and Buccleuch House, while on the western side of the site are the offices of the Civil Service Commission. Between this house and the site of the police offices is a temporary plank-made road for heavy carts, which deliver the material for building, entering from the Thames Embankment, and passing into Cannon-row, whence they emerge into Parliament-street or into Bridge-street, Westminster. The road by which the loaded carts enter is the nearest way to the recess where the body was found. Brought in a cart, and carried as a load across the planks on to the building, its disposal would be easy in the recess. The murderer, too, could have chosen the dinner hour at which the cart should arrive. There is no doubt the deposit was made by someone intimately acquainted with all the intricacies of the underground part of these works. This fact narrows the examination.

[RockySullivan]

Hi JG,

The boat is an interesting theory. You may also find this article in the Star of interest.

The Star
FRIDAY, 5 OCTOBER, 1888.

The theory that the victim of the Whitehall crime was a lady, or at any rate a person of good position, which has been asserted, is not now countenanced by the police. It is more likely she was an unfortunate or a servant. Dr. Neville adheres to the opinion that the hand showed indications of hard work. The skin was rough and hard. The finger nails were dirty. It is believed that the head had been cleanly cut from the body by a very sharp instrument, and that the victim was a dark-complexioned woman, presumed to be about 26 years of age, and in stature 5ft. 7in or 5ft. 8in. The site of the new police offices, where the National Opera House was to have been erected, faces the Embankment, and backs on Cannon-row. It is on the west side of the gardens of Whitehall and Buccleuch House, while on the western side of the site are the offices of the Civil Service Commission. Between this house and the site of the police offices is a temporary plank-made road for heavy carts, which deliver the material for building, entering from the Thames Embankment, and passing into Cannon-row, whence they emerge into Parliament-street or into Bridge-street, Westminster. The road by which the loaded carts enter is the nearest way to the recess where the body was found. Brought in a cart, and carried as a load across the planks on to the building, its disposal would be easy in the recess. The murderer, too, could have chosen the dinner hour at which the cart should arrive. There is no doubt the deposit was made by someone intimately acquainted with all the intricacies of the underground part of these works. This fact narrows the examination.

Good post. Now it sounds very similar to the pinchin dump. Did fairclough's next to the railway arch have carts going out?

[Trevor Marriott]

#

Hello Trevor,

Motive may be an issue. As I've suggested before it is possible that a serial killer was intending to taunt the police or other authorities. That may explain, for instance, the Whitehall Torso, left in the New Scotland Yard building; the Tottenham Torso, left in an area almost constantly patrolled by the police and next to a military drill hall; and the Pinchin Street Torso, possibly murdered on the anniversary of Annie Chapman's death, and possibly left by the same railway arches that Schwartz ran to. And then there's the word "Lipski" written in large chalk letters by some nearby railings.

I also believe that the perpetrator may have had a boat. A boat would clearly be an ideal place to dismember and store the bodies. It would explain the connection to the Thames: The Scotland Yard building was on the embankment and could be accessed via boat, thus avoiding the 9ft fence; several body parts were thrown in the Thames; Liz Jackson had been sleeping rough by the embankment.

What sort of a boat? There weren't no cabin cruisers in those days.

Boats had crew members who probably bunked together in cabins So for someone to take a female on board would stick out, and to kill that person and dismember that person also highly unlikely. The docks were nearby and so boats would dock there. Those boats waiting to come into docks would mostly tie up in the thames.

There is no evidence to suggest taunting or the shock factor.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Hello Trevor,

Firstly that still doesn't explain the risks that were taken when disposing of the remains. Secondly, if the perpetrator was some deranged individual, carrying out medical procedures without the most rudimentary knowledge of such procedures, it would surely still be a case of murder. For instance, prior to the Homicide Act, 1957, the Felony Murder Rule would still be applicable. And under this rule you could be charged with murder if the underlying felony presented a foreseeable danger to life and the link between the felony and the death was not too remote.

Where does this term deranged individual come from. I am sure these back st medicos were not deranged.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk