The Whitehall Mystery

[Trevor Marriott]

Where is there evidence of any medical procedure being carried out on any of these victims?

None of us are medical experts. Dr Biggs who is an expert cannot conclude murder or otherwise. But lets apply a common sense approach to what we do have.

If simple dismemberment had taken place then we could argue murder because there would be signs of trauma or perhaps stab wounds on the body parts and we could appreciate the need for the killer to dispose of the body to hide that murder and to hide the identity of the victim

With these torsos in many case they show no signs of trauma or stab wounds from what was recovered. The abdomens were opened up and vital parts missing in some case. That, applying common sense shows that the abdomens were opened up for a specific purpose. Knife wounds from a frenzied abdominal attack would as likley as not have been visible to the doctors. So What was the purpose for the opening of the abdomens?

The torsos were found some distance apart from each other, and lengthy spells between the finds. Of those identified they all seem to have frequented different areas. They were all female and young in age.

So whether you accept it or not, it takes us back to back street procedures that went wrong and the women died.

On another medical note I doubt whether the doctors way back then would have been able to detect the presence of poisons or other noxious substances after the torsos had been in the water for some considerable time. So the statements they made on this topic are unsafe to be relied on. Even in this day and age sample have to taken and examined by a toxicologist.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[John G]

A better approach, altogether - although we need once again to admit that this was a killer who - if your (and my, as it were) assessment that he sought to shock and taunt has anything going for it - was quite willing to take risks!

That is why I say we can´t have it both ways. And it is also where I see a possibility to bridge the differences between the torso killer and Jack the Ripper; if the deeds were in both cases to an (unknown) extent designed to meet other preferences than his own, then we cannot say that both series could not be by the same hand. Plus, of course, we could add historical predecessors with VERY varying mo:s between their killings, like for instance Peter Kürten, where the Duesseldorf police sought three or four different killers, but found them compiled into one man only.

I think Kurten is a good example of a killer whose MO was all over the place. However, it appears to me that both JtR and the torso killer were pretty consistent, although there is clearly evidence of evolution or elaboration of the ritual, i.e. in the torso killer seemed to progress from simple dismemberment, whilst retaining the head, to mutilating his victims and possibly removing body parts.

The difficulty is that if we speculate they were the same killer then both MO and signature become very confused. Thus, in the guise of the torso killer he follows a familiar pattern: he murders his victims away from public places and uses dump sites to dispose of the remains. He also dismembers his victims, progressing to mutilation and organ removal, and retains the heads.

However, contemporaneous to the torso killer's activities he develops a very different persona and strategy. This time he focuses only on Whitechapel and the surrounding district. He doesn't use dump sites and makes no effort to dismember his victims. Nonetheless, as Keppel (2005) points out, there is evidence of a logical progression across a continuum of escalating violence. Thus, Keppel argues that Tabram was the first victim and the killer inflicts multiple stab wounds, focusing particularly on the breasts and genital areas. Keppel assumes that he was interrupted with Stride, but in respect of Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly we see a logical progression, involving mutilations, evisceration, the harvesting of organs and, ultimately, the display of organs at the scene of crime. And, in every case but Stride, we see the consistency of multiple stab wounds to the genital area, another important distinction to the torso killer's signature: this resulted in JtR being labelled a lust murderer by Keppel.

To summarize, if you consider the murders from the perspective of two different serial killer's, each with a different Mo, signature and evolution of ritual, then they make sense. Otherwise, by suggesting that one killer was responsible for all of these murder, it makes no sense at all.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi John
I think many would have been operated by two men, depending on the journey and amount of physical work involved but there are many photographs in existence that show lone lightermen at work on the Thames so they must have gone out alone sometimes too.

Photo of lighter barge

Hardly equipped for entertaining ladies :

The boat theory has sunk without trace (no pun intended)

[John G]

None of us are medical experts. Dr Biggs who is an expert cannot conclude murder or otherwise. But lets apply a common sense approach to what we do have.

If simple dismemberment had taken place then we could argue murder because there would be signs of trauma or perhaps stab wounds on the body parts and we could appreciate the need for the killer to dispose of the body to hide that murder and to hide the identity of the victim

With these torsos in many case they show no signs of trauma or stab wounds from what was recovered. The abdomens were opened up and vital parts missing in some case. That, applying common sense shows that the abdomens were opened up for a specific purpose. Knife wounds from a frenzied abdominal attack would as likley as not have been visible to the doctors. So What was the purpose for the opening of the abdomens?

The torsos were found some distance apart from each other, and lengthy spells between the finds. Of those identified they all seem to have frequented different areas. They were all female and young in age.

So whether you accept it or not, it takes us back to back street procedures that went wrong and the women died.

On another medical note I doubt whether the doctors way back then would have been able to detect the presence of poisons or other noxious substances after the torsos had been in the water for some considerable time. So the statements they made on this topic are unsafe to be relied on. Even in this day and age sample have to taken and examined by a toxicologist.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hello Trevor,

They could have been murdered in any number of ways. For instance, the heads were never found so death could have been as a result of trauma to the head or even strangulation.

Regarding back street medicos. I can only keep restating what Debra has pointed out on numerous occasions: there is no logical reason why a back street procedure, i.e. abortion, should involve the mutilating of the abdominal region, unless we're dealing with a particularly sick individual, who just thought he'd have a go at experimenting with some abdominal surgery! But that would surely still constitute an act of murder.

[John G]

I am not so certain about the scaling of a nine foot fence thats going to extreme lengths for killer or medico when there were much easier and more accessible locations. I think those facts may be wrongly reported or have been misinterpreted .

As to the rest of your post I think you are trying to fit square pegs into round holes. You are trying to read things that are not there to be read.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Depositing the remains in the foundations of the Scotland Yard building, in pitch black darkness, was also going to extreme lengths! That's why I believe we're looking at a serial killer determined to make a statement.

[Debra A]

So whether you accept it or not, it takes us back to back street procedures that went wrong and the women died.

No it doesn't. Show us an example where an 'illegal operation' meant anything but an abortion. Of the four cases 87-89, death while procuring an abortion could only ever be the cause of death in two of the cases. Neither the Pinchin St torso or the Rainham victim were pregnant.

If these women had died in the workhouse and their bodies were sold on to anatomists who removed organs, there had to have been a cause of death originally, disease or infection being most likely in a young woman, and these causes would have been most likely detectable at post mortem of the remains.

[John G]

Photo of lighter barge

Hardly equipped for entertaining ladies :

The boat theory has sunk without trace (no pun intended)

Well if they were already dead he wouldn't need to entertain them! He just needed somewhere secluded to undertake the dismemberment and a means of transporting the remains to dump sites. Methinks the boat theory is still very much afloat-not so sure about the crazed medico theory though!

[Debra A]

Photo of lighter barge

Hardly equipped for entertaining ladies :

The boat theory has sunk without trace (no pun intended)

And yet it still seems more plausible than a lot of your theories, Trevor.
We aren't talking a crazed medic with a full operating theatre performing abdominal section abortions after all!

[Debra A]

Well if they were already dead he wouldn't need to entertain them! He just needed somewhere secluded to undertake the dismemberment and a means of transporting the remains to dump sites. Methinks the boat theory is still very much afloat-not so sure about the crazed medico theory though!

Ha! Our posts crossed again.

[Abby Normal]

I think Kurten is a good example of a killer whose MO was all over the place. However, it appears to me that both JtR and the torso killer were pretty consistent, although there is clearly evidence of evolution or elaboration of the ritual, i.e. in the torso killer seemed to progress from simple dismemberment, whilst retaining the head, to mutilating his victims and possibly removing body parts.

The difficulty is that if we speculate they were the same killer then both MO and signature become very confused. Thus, in the guise of the torso killer he follows a familiar pattern: he murders his victims away from public places and uses dump sites to dispose of the remains. He also dismembers his victims, progressing to mutilation and organ removal, and retains the heads.

However, contemporaneous to the torso killer's activities he develops a very different persona and strategy. This time he focuses only on Whitechapel and the surrounding district. He doesn't use dump sites and makes no effort to dismember his victims. Nonetheless, as Keppel (2005) points out, there is evidence of a logical progression across a continuum of escalating violence. Thus, Keppel argues that Tabram was the first victim and the killer inflicts multiple stab wounds, focusing particularly on the breasts and genital areas. Keppel assumes that he was interrupted with Stride, but in respect of Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly we see a logical progression, involving mutilations, evisceration, the harvesting of organs and, ultimately, the display of organs at the scene of crime. And, in every case but Stride, we see the consistency of multiple stab wounds to the genital area, another important distinction to the torso killer's signature: this resulted in JtR being labelled a lust murderer by Keppel.

To summarize, if you consider the murders from the perspective of two different serial killer's, each with a different Mo, signature and evolution of ritual, then they make sense. Otherwise, by suggesting that one killer was responsible for all of these murder, it makes no sense at all.

Hi JohnG
But if we take dismemberment out of the equation (say because its just for ease in getting rid of bodies of victims from his place) then aren't torso man and the ripper both evolving and escalating basically the same in regards to organ removal?

[Trevor Marriott]

Hello Trevor,

They could have been murdered in any number of ways. For instance, the heads were never found so death could have been as a result of trauma to the head or even strangulation.

Regarding back street medicos. I can only keep restating what Debra has pointed out on numerous occasions: there is no logical reason why a back street procedure, i.e. abortion, should involve the mutilating of the abdominal region, unless we're dealing with a particularly sick individual, who just thought he'd have a go at experimenting with some abdominal surgery! But that would surely still constitute an act of murder.

Well if anyone died as result of any operation connected with an abortion or any other illegal operation it would still be willful murder. Debra is not a medical expert and can only comment on what she has read. What really went on way back then may not have been documented for obvious reasons.

Who would be around to document it ?

So if they had their heads caved in or were strangled why open up the abdomens, why remove organs, when the priority would have been to conceal the murder and to hide the identity of the victim.

You seem to keep dodging the obvious here and you wont accept as I do that the causes of death are not conclusively proven, and by your serial killer belief you are not prepared to consider other possibilities.

So if you want to keep believeing that they were the work of a serial killer so be it, others will have and are entitled to their own different opinions.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Abby Normal]

Photo of lighter barge

Hardly equipped for entertaining ladies :

The boat theory has sunk without trace (no pun intended)

no it hasn't. just means he would have used a smaller boat.

[Trevor Marriott]

Depositing the remains in the foundations of the Scotland Yard building, in pitch black darkness, was also going to extreme lengths! That's why I believe we're looking at a serial killer determined to make a statement.

yes that statement was probably "Should have gone to specsavers"

[John G]

Well if anyone died as result of any operation connected with an abortion or any other illegal operation it would still be willful murder. Debra is not a medical expert and can only comment on what she has read. What really went on way back then may not have been documented for obvious reasons.

Who would be around to document it ?

So if they had their heads caved in or were strangled why open up the abdomens, why remove organs, when the priority would have been to conceal the murder and to hide the identity of the victim.

You seem to keep dodging the obvious here and you wont accept as I do that the causes of death are not conclusively proven, and by your serial killer belief you are not prepared to consider other possibilities.

So if you want to keep believeing that they were the work of a serial killer so be it, others will have and are entitled to their own different opinions.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hello Trevor,

Yes, I accept everyone's entitled to express their own opinions. However, in answer to your question, some of JtR's victims were strangled: why did he subsequently have a need to mutilate his victims and remove organs? Surely you don't suspect that he was a back street abortionist as well!

[Trevor Marriott]

no it hasn't. just means he would have used a smaller boat.

Perhaps a row boat, here is a pic this could be the killer with one of his victims.

A moonlight tryst along the thames

Soon as he cast off she could have been drowned when he shouted "All oars overboard "