The Whitehall Mystery

[John G]

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

Hi Abby,

Weren't some Victorian boats equipped with engines? If so, it could have been a larger boat manned by a single individual.

[Trevor Marriott]

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 need to mutilate his victims and remove organs? Surely you don't suspect that he was a back street abortionist as well!

Your statement is only true if JTR removed the organs but thats for another thread and that has been gone over many time before and i am not going into it all again.

May be you need to re-evaluate because there are many that don't believe there was a singular killer called JTR so even more controversy.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Abby,

Weren't some Victorian boats equipped with engines? If so, it could have been a larger boat manned by a single individual.

John
You are all as sixes and sevens, you suggest that the Ripper murders and The Whitechapel torsos are the work of the same person.

Now you want to suggest that the Toros serial killer was sailing up and down the length and breadth of the river thames picking up prostitues taking them back and murdering them. Thats not in line with the Whitechapel murderer is it.

You real do have a bee in your bonnet about these torsos being the work of a serial killer

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[John G]

Your statement is only true if JTR removed the organs but thats for another thread and that has been gone over many time before and i am not going into it all again.

May be you need to re-evaluate because there are many that don't believe there was a singular killer called JTR so even more controversy.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

My theory isn't dependent on JtR. For example, Schlesinger (2010) refer to a serial killer who committed genital mutilations and then progressed to dismemberment. In fact nearly all serial killers exercise ritualistic behaviour and the ritual can evolve or become more elaborate: see Schlesinger (2010). There torso killer may therefore have progressed from dismemberment to include abdominal mutilations.

[John G]

John
You are all as sixes and sevens, you suggest that the Ripper murders and The Whitechapel torsos are the work of the same person.

Now you want to suggest that the Toros serial killer was sailing up and down the length and breadth of the river thames picking up prostitues taking them back and murdering them. Thats not in line with the Whitechapel murderer is it.

You real do have a bee in your bonnet about these torsos being the work of a serial killer

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Trevor,

No I haven't, I've consistently argued the exact opposite! I think you're getting me mixed up with another poster. I have consistently argued that the Torso killer and JtR were different people: see post 422, for example. I merely mentioned JtR to illustrate that serial killers sometimes as part of a ritual, mutilate their victims and remove organs.

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor,

No I haven't, I've consistently argued the exact opposite! I think you're getting me mixed up with another poster. I have consistently argued that the Torso killer and JtR were different people: see post 422, for example.

If I have got you mixed up then I apologize then disregard my comments

[John G]

If I have got you mixed up then I apologize then disregard my comments

Thanks Trevor. No problem, there certainly seems to be a lot of conflicting ideas on this thread!

[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?

[John G]

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?

Hi Abby,

In my opinion there has to be two different killers. As I've argued, I can accept that a signature can evolve, or become more elaborate. However, it makes no sense to me that two significantly different signatures, and MOs, can co-exist within the same time frame.

Thus, the torso killer appears to operate over a wide area, dismembers his victims in private locations, and uses dump sites. His signature also evolves from dismemberment, to abdominal mutilation and organ removal. He also retains the heads of his victims, possibly keeping them for trophies, or to disguise their identity, or in pursuant of both objectives.

On the other hand, JtR focuses his activities exclusively within Whitechapel and the surrounding area. He murders and mutilates his victims in public locations and doesn't use dump sites. Nor does he decapitate his victims, or attempt to disguise their identity in any way. And his signature evolves in a very differently. Thus, If you accept Keppel, he begins by stabbing, focusing on the breasts and genital area (Tabram), progresses to abdominal and neck mutilations (Nichols), then to removing organs (Chapman) and facial mutilation (Eddowes); and finally he displays the body parts and inflicts more severe facial mutilations (Kelly).

In summary, if we treat these murders as two separate series, with very different ritualistic progressions, they make sense. Otherwise, from the perspective of a single killer, they make no logical sense.

[Fisherman]

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.

On the surface of things, no - you are completely correct thus far.

Which is why I say that we must speculate in things moving UNDER the surface in order to comprehend how they could have been one and the same. And of course, whichever speculation we engage in, it will be less logical than the two killers theories!

However, just as you paint a picture where doubt must be inserted, another picture can be painted where it all fits. Like this, for example:

The torso killer is at odds with the world he lives in. He wants to get back at society. He also has serious hangups about women. His solution to take the pressure of himself is to kill women and dismember them. And in doing so, he decides to taunt the police and society by scattering the bodies all over London in little bits and pieces.

He finds that he gets publicity, but not as much as he would like to. He keeps trying, though, and he eagerly reads the papers trying to take in the reactions.
When doing so, he realizes that people find it totally revolting if inner organs are removed from murder victims. He comes up with the idea that he may gain more publicity if he takes organs away from the victims. He begins by cutting into the lower abdomen of Tabram, but fails to accomplish his target. Nichols is next, but he is disturbed there. Then he goes to town with Chapman, and all the while the press coverage increases - Chapman produces a peak. So he continues, taunting the police by killing out in the open streets, and making them look like fools - he did not have that side effect with the torso killings.

Then, after Kelly, he does not get the same kick out of it any longer - he has accomplished what he set out to do, and he cannot think of how to go further.

When the press starts to speculate that he is gone, he kills again, but not with the same conviction - the physical thrill has gone to some extent, and only the wish to take credit for it remains. Compare, if you will, the BTK killer, who had stopped killing, but who was drawn into the game again for egotistical reasons - he did not want the police not to believe that he was not the monster he had painted himself out as in taunting letters to the police.

To me, this is a way of bridging the gap. Purely speculative, yes - but the fact of the matter is that two serialists in the same run of years, with the same type of victims, broadly speaking, with an interest to cut into bodies and with what seemed a wish to shock and taunt, how likely is that? Just look at Abberline: Wow, we HAVE a serialist in Chapman, so he MUST have been the Ripper.

A lot more farfetched, Iīd say, given the MO:s - but a speculation that MUST be made in an era where serialists were extremely rare. And in the torso killer/Ripper case(s), it would be much more called for.

Once we introduce the element of playing to the galleries (press, public, police), the certainty that no two killers could be too far apart in mo is effectively dissolved in my eyes. The larger the element of communication, the wider the scope of differing mo:s can be accepted.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

In my opinion there has to be two different killers. As I've argued, I can accept that a signature can evolve, or become more elaborate. However, it makes no sense to me that two significantly different signatures, and MOs, can co-exist within the same time frame.

Thus, the torso killer appears to operate over a wide area, dismembers his victims in private locations, and uses dump sites. His signature also evolves from dismemberment, to abdominal mutilation and organ removal. He also retains the heads of his victims, possibly keeping them for trophies, or to disguise their identity, or in pursuant of both objectives.

On the other hand, JtR focuses his activities exclusively within Whitechapel and the surrounding area. He murders and mutilates his victims in public locations and doesn't use dump sites. Nor does he decapitate his victims, or attempt to disguise their identity in any way. And his signature evolves in a very differently. Thus, If you accept Keppel, he begins by stabbing, focusing on the breasts and genital area (Tabram), progresses to abdominal and neck mutilations (Nichols), then to removing organs (Chapman) and facial mutilation (Eddowes); and finally he displays the body parts and inflicts more severe facial mutilations (Kelly).

In summary, if we treat these murders as two separate series, with very different ritualistic progressions, they make sense. Otherwise, from the perspective of a single killer, they make no logical sense.

Hi johnG
Yes yes I know all that. you have stated it many times. (and believe me I see the differences).

Im asking you to look at the similarities. indulge me. Take the dismemberment(and of course subsequent dumpings) out of the equation and pretend that they were just done in ease for removing bodies from his house.

Now-do the mutilations seem similar? is there similar possible escalation/evolution? Are the wounds similar?

and just a gentle nudge for you here-consider the incredible similarities between the way both Jackson and Kelly were cut open.

and take into considerarion that the drs thought that the killer may have tried to take the head off chapman and I believe eddowes also.

Similarities??

[Abby Normal]

On the surface of things, no - you are completely correct thus far.

Which is why I say that we must speculate in things moving UNDER the surface in order to comprehend how they could have been one and the same. And of course, whichever speculation we engage in, it will be less logical than the two killers theories!

However, just as you paint a picture where doubt must be inserted, another picture can be painted where it all fits. Like this, for example:

The torso killer is at odds with the world he lives in. He wants to get back at society. He also has serious hangups about women. His solution to take the pressure of himself is to kill women and dismember them. And in doing so, he decides to taunt the police and society by scattering the bodies all over London in little bits and pieces.

He finds that he gets publicity, but not as much as he would like to. He keeps trying, though, and he eagerly reads the papers trying to take in the reactions.
When doing so, he realizes that people find it totally revolting if inner organs are removed from murder victims. He comes up with the idea that he may gain more publicity if he takes organs away from the victims. He begins by cutting into the lower abdomen of Tabram, but fails to accomplish his target. Nichols is next, but he is disturbed there. Then he goes to town with Chapman, and all the while the press coverage increases - Chapman produces a peak. So he continues, taunting the police by killing out in the open streets, and making them look like fools - he did not have that side effect with the torso killings.

Then, after Kelly, he does not get the same kick out of it any longer - he has accomplished what he set out to do, and he cannot think of how to go further.

When the press starts to speculate that he is gone, he kills again, but not with the same conviction - the physical thrill has gone to some extent, and only the wish to take credit for it remains. Compare, if you will, the BTK killer, who had stopped killing, but who was drawn into the game again for egotistical reasons - he did not want the police not to believe that he was not the monster he had painted himself out as in taunting letters to the police.

To me, this is a way of bridging the gap. Purely speculative, yes - but the fact of the matter is that two serialists in the same run of years, with the same type of victims, broadly speaking, with an interest to cut into bodies and with what seemed a wish to shock and taunt, how likely is that? Just look at Abberline: Wow, we HAVE a serialist in Chapman, so he MUST have been the Ripper.

A lot more farfetched, Iīd say, given the MO:s - but a speculation that MUST be made in an era where serialists were extremely rare. And in the torso killer/Ripper case(s), it would be much more called for.

Once we introduce the element of playing to the galleries (press, public, police), the certainty that no two killers could be too far apart in mo is effectively dissolved in my eyes. The larger the element of communication, the wider the scope of differing mo:s can be accepted.

Interesting fish
But I see what really "bridges the gap" between the two is the similar abdominal mutilations, organ removal, and taking away of some body parts as trophies.

Perhaps dismemberment is only in ease of disposal of bodies from the killers private place.

Perhaps the ripper murders are when Lech cant bring them to his private place-his mothers? or perhaps the family cats meat shop? somewhere in Pickfords? or some other bolt hole he has? So he has to kill them on the street, whenever he gets the chance.

And the torsos are when he can bring them to a private place?

He has a secondary motivation to taunt/shock the police and public so that's why the some of the body parts are strewn about in public.

But I totally agree with you on the rarity of two serial killers operating in the same time and place, especially back then and especially two POST MORTEM MUTILATORS. The odds of that seem incredibly high to me.

[David Orsam]

Well if you argue that and suggest that Mary Kelly was killed by the same killer as the rest why did he not take the whole body contents with him ?

Hi Trevor, I'm intrigued by the way you have phrased the above. I note that you have also referred in this thread to "the myth that JTR was responsible for all the Whitechapel murders" (#94) and have said "it should be noted that not all of the Whitechapel victims were killed by the same hand" (#355).

By way of clarification, may I ask: is it your contention that the killer of Mary Jane Kelly was a different person from the individual (or individuals) who killed any or all of Polly Nichols, Annie Chapman, Elizabeth Stride and Catherine Eddowes?

[Fisherman]

Interesting fish
But I see what really "bridges the gap" between the two is the similar abdominal mutilations, organ removal, and taking away of some body parts as trophies.

Perhaps dismemberment is only in ease of disposal of bodies from the killers private place.

Perhaps the ripper murders are when Lech cant bring them to his private place-his mothers? or perhaps the family cats meat shop? somewhere in Pickfords? or some other bolt hole he has? So he has to kill them on the street, whenever he gets the chance.

And the torsos are when he can bring them to a private place?

He has a secondary motivation to taunt/shock the police and public so that's why the some of the body parts are strewn about in public.

But I totally agree with you on the rarity of two serial killers operating in the same time and place, especially back then and especially two POST MORTEM MUTILATORS. The odds of that seem incredibly high to me.

Well, I was working from a perspective where I offered a second level of motivations for the crimes as such. The thing is, most people will not consider the implications of such a second level, but instead choose to think that a serial killer is always ruled by his urges and crimes instead of looking at it the other way around. And once we speculate that a killer could not deviate by his own free will from what is perceived as a predetermined MO, it makes all the sense in the world to suggest that the Ripper and the Torso killer must be different people.

That is where I placed the emphasis, but it goes without saying - and I have said so before myself in this debate - that the surrounding circumstances as such may ALSO have played a role in any change we identify.

Speculating along your lines, Elizabeth Stride may well be an interesting example - what if she was grabbed by the Torso killer, who tried to drag her along with him, pulling at her wrist to get her into the street?
Maybe she would have ended up in little parcels, floating in the Thames, if she had not physically resisted BS man?

Speculation, conjecture, thought-up scenarios, yes; but if we donīt speculate, we will fail to do what we should do - turn every stone over.

[John G]

Hi johnG
Yes yes I know all that. you have stated it many times. (and believe me I see the differences).

Im asking you to look at the similarities. indulge me. Take the dismemberment(and of course subsequent dumpings) out of the equation and pretend that they were just done in ease for removing bodies from his house.

Now-do the mutilations seem similar? is there similar possible escalation/evolution? Are the wounds similar?

and just a gentle nudge for you here-consider the incredible similarities between the way both Jackson and Kelly were cut open.

and take into considerarion that the drs thought that the killer may have tried to take the head off chapman and I believe eddowes also.

Similarities??

Hello Abby,

Yes, I would have to concede that there are intriguing similarities between some of the mutilations, especially Kelly and Jackson. Of course, Kelly probably most resembles a Torso victim, although there was still no decapitation or attempt at dismemberment, even though time/privacy were probably not an issue.

I suppose one way of considering a possible link is two serial killers operating together, like Duffy and Mulchay, Bianchi and Buono, although that would be a rare scenario.

Thinking really outside the box, I once speculated that some of these murders could be much he consequence of gang activity, I.e Smith, in which JtR was a member. However, JtR then branched out by himself. However, I think that's a really unlikely scenario!