Same motive = same killer

[RockySullivan]

There was nothing to stop them scattering body parts in a quiet, open street if they felt like it.

i mean...that's what they did. unless i'm missing your point

[Sam Flynn]

i mean...that's what they did. unless i'm missing your point

The majority of the body parts were dumped in the Thames or stashed away under cover (be it a railway arch or a subterranean vault). Why not leave them in the southwest London equivalent of Bucks Row or Mitre Square? "There's nobody around, so I'll dump the leg here... That'll scare 'em", kind of thing.

[Fisherman]

The majority of the body parts were dumped in the Thames or stashed away under cover (be it a railway arch or a subterranean vault). Why not leave them in the southwest London equivalent of Bucks Row or Mitre Square? "There's nobody around, so I'll dump the leg here... That'll scare 'em", kind of thing.

So people were NOT scared by the way the torso killer went about his busness? Is that it?

You ask why he did not dump the parts in the southwest London equivalent of Bucks Row, and that is a far better question than it may seem from the outset. Because once things are not done the simple way, once there are many different and differing dumping sites, we must ask ourselves why the killer did what he did.

I would propse that in the choice between dumping the parts in any back street and dumping them in the vaults of the New Scotland Yard, the latter will terrify the public a lot more, and for good reasons; a killer who is that brazen and has that kind of guts, is a far more unpleasant thought than somebody who empties a sack of bones in Salamanca Court.

By the way, your insistence that the Torso killer was based in soutwestern London is something that should be looked at against the background of how you complain about how I am not objective on account of my saying that it is just the one killer.

I have presented a lot of evidence - the cuts to the abdomen, the stolen rings, the taken out uteri, the lost hearts, the flaps from the abdomen - that speak for my solution in a VERY loud and clear voice.

But you say that it is "almost certain" that the torso killer lived in the western parts of London with no other substantiation than the fact that most of the parts seem to have been thrown in the Thames there. The fact that the parts could have been transported there, the fact that other parts were found in other places all over London, is immaterial to you, apparently.

So I express a certainty based on very clear evidence.

And you express a certainty based on nothing at all.

And then YOU call ME not objective.

That was never going to work, Gareth.

[John Wheat]

I also think the contemporary police would love my work.

Really? No one else does.

[Sam Flynn]

It's an objective fact that the focus of the torso dump sites was predominantly in southwest London. The most parsimonious explanation by far is that the perpetrators had easy access to that part of town. The most likely explanation for this is that they also lived there, or at the very least that the vast majority of the bodies were "processed" there. That somebody living outside southwest London dissected the victims elsewhere and transported them to (e.g.) Battersea is the least likely interpretation of the data.

[Elamarna]

The fact that a torso was found on Pinchin Street strengthens the case.

No Christer, it does not.

The fact that his mother lived in Mary Ann Street strengthtens he case.

Again it does not, you see what you do because you wish to see links.
In reality the link is no more than kosminski's links to the Stride case, possabilties and assumptions, nothing more.

The fact that Lechmere has logical ties to all the murder sites in the Ripper series strengthens the case.

The reality is Lechmere is linked to Bucks Row. There is also a geographic link to Chapman, given it is on the same route; however the timing does not support a real link.

The 3rd can only be tied in by suggesting a proposed trip to a mother, involving a route which does not lead directly to or from the Stride site.
The Eddowes case is based on using the 3rd.

Yes my dear Christer there are ties, however they are for the most superficial and weak. They form a framework for an hypothesis, not the details required to prove such.
Therefore they do not strengthen the case.

Steve

[John Wheat]

No Christer, it does not.


Again it does not, you see what you do because you wish to see links.
In reality the link is no more than kosminski's links to the Stride case, possabilties and assumptions, nothing more.



The reality is Lechmere is linked to Bucks Row. There is also a geographic link to Chapman, given it is on the same route; however the timing does not support a real link.

The 3rd can only be tied in by suggesting a proposed trip to a mother, involving a route which does not lead directly to or from the Stride site.
The Eddowes case is based on using the 3rd.

Yes my dear Christer there are ties, however they are for the most superficial and weak. They form a framework for an hypothesis, not the details required to prove such.
Therefore they do not strengthen the case.

Steve

Hi Steve

I fear you're wasting your breath on the deluded.

Cheers John

[Fisherman]

Really? No one else does.

Well, John, if you are the true spokesman of every other poster out here, then I am in a lot of trouble.

I can only hope that note everybody puts that kind of trust in you.

[Fisherman]

Sam Flynn: It's an objective fact that the focus of the torso dump sites was predominantly in southwest London.

Yes! And is anybody saying anything else?

The most parsimonious explanation by far is that the perpetrators had easy access to that part of town.

Well, whether it was "easy" or not, we cannot tell, but access he had, we can see that much. And I fail to see that anybody is denying that.

The most likely explanation for this is that they also lived there, or at the very least that the vast majority of the bodies were "processed" there.

Yes, that is the most likely explanation, and once again, I fail to see anybody claiming something else - but it is NOT the only possible explanation by any standards! And THAT is where you must be criticized, for claiming that it is "almost certain" that the killer lived in the western parts of London!

I am glad that you seem to have come to your senses again. The claims you now make are radically different from your former ones and much, much sounder. I agree as clearly on these points as I disagree with the claim that it is "almost certain" that the killer lived in western London.

[Elamarna]

these are the two posts by you and El that set me off:



one snide comment by you--- and el, with a rather for some reason long post that amounts to -this thread is useless.

and most of both have been along these lines. if you don't agree fine, that's one thing-I'm not 100% convinced either but lets stop with this crap. You guys are usually some of the best contributors out here, which is why its so disappointing, and frustrating to see this BS ad nauseum.

Abby

My comments were refering to an early post I made in this thread that I saw little new evidence related to if it were the same motive or killer. The thread itself has had some great info., but I respectfully suggest little which helps with the actual title.


Steve

[John Wheat]

Well, John, if you are the true spokesman of every other poster out here, then I am in a lot of trouble.

I can only hope that note everybody puts that kind of trust in you.

Well the fact that no one is leaping to your defence speaks volumes.

[Fisherman]

Well the fact that no one is leaping to your defence speaks volumes.

And the fact that nobody is cheering you on speaks of what, John? Maybe how people won´t touch your arguing with a ten foot pole?

[Fisherman]

No Christer, it does not.


Again it does not, you see what you do because you wish to see links.
In reality the link is no more than kosminski's links to the Stride case, possabilties and assumptions, nothing more.



The reality is Lechmere is linked to Bucks Row. There is also a geographic link to Chapman, given it is on the same route; however the timing does not support a real link.

The 3rd can only be tied in by suggesting a proposed trip to a mother, involving a route which does not lead directly to or from the Stride site.
The Eddowes case is based on using the 3rd.

Yes my dear Christer there are ties, however they are for the most superficial and weak. They form a framework for an hypothesis, not the details required to prove such.
Therefore they do not strengthen the case.

Steve

The idea that proven geographical connections between a suspect and murder sites do not strenghten a case is all new and very revolutionary.

And bonkers, of course, but why let that stand in the way for your innovative new take on criminal investigations?

The idea that these matters need to be conclusively proven before they can add to a case is also a complete breakthrough for your alternative take on criminal investigation techniques. It eradicates any middle stage of an investigation where suspicions grow on account of soundly suggested links, and we go from suspicion to conviction without any tedious stages of amassing evidence.

It is not less bonkers than the former suggestion. It is not more bonkers either. Bonkers is bonkers.

You really need to be more honest about your decision to fight the Lechmere idea, come what may. Since it shown in Technicolor, there is no good reason to try and hide it in retrospect. You can learn from John Wheat, who is very clearly at risk of developing ulcers at the very thought of me being correct. If you got it, flaunt it, sort of. And me oh my, have you got it!!

[Sam Flynn]

And THAT is where you must be criticized, for claiming that it is "almost certain" that the killer lived in the western parts of London!

Perhaps "it" is not almost certain, but "I" am almost certain that he/they did, based on an entirely dispassionate consideration of the distribution of the body parts and the nature of the crimes themselves. Taking similar considerations into account, I have good reason to suspect that the Pinchin Street Torso crime was committed by an entirely different person, neither "the" Torso Killer nor Jack the Ripper.

[RockySullivan]

The majority of the body parts were dumped in the Thames or stashed away under cover (be it a railway arch or a subterranean vault). Why not leave them in the southwest London equivalent of Bucks Row or Mitre Square? "There's nobody around, so I'll dump the leg here... That'll scare 'em", kind of thing.

Right and why didnt the ripper kill mary kelly and annie chapman out in the street? Pinchin torso dump is just like Berner st. "That'll scare em"? huh what are you a fish