Same motive = same killer

[RockySullivan]

Yes, and that is probably why this thread has resulted in over 2000 posts; because nobody can be bothered.

That's taking credit for the interest the torso murders have generated, mostly due to the research of others. and you haven't done any serious research like the others on this subject at all. just wanted to clarify why this thread has over 2000 posts though genius. it's like 75 % you and 25 % sam bickering with you.

[Fisherman]

That's taking credit for the interest the torso murders have generated, mostly due to the research of others. and you haven't done any serious research like the others on this subject at all. just wanted to clarify why this thread has over 2000 posts though genius. it's like 75 % you and 25 % sam bickering with you.

I´d be happy to explain to you how these matters really work - but not as long as you cannot bring yourself to a decent attitude, dropping the namecalling and the false accusations.
As long as that goes on, you will get the kind of treatment you deserve, and you will be hung out for it.

Like now.

[John Wheat]

Yes, and that is probably why this thread has resulted in over 2000 posts; because nobody can be bothered.

Refresh my mind: how many posts did that thread of yours on Bury generate?

Now that you have been deservedly flattened, I will retract from any further debate with you for the time being. Quite frankly, it is below me.

This thread is a Torso Killer thread not the usual **** about Lechmere who it has to be noted only a few lunatics regard as a serious Ripper suspect with you the most deluded at the forefront. As for Bury anyone who doesn't view as a serious Ripper is deluded at best.

[John Wheat]

I´d be happy to explain to you how these matters really work - but not as long as you cannot bring yourself to a decent attitude, dropping the namecalling and the false accusations.
As long as that goes on, you will get the kind of treatment you deserve, and you will be hung out for it.

Like now.

Rocky's just telling it like it is unlike some round here. It's probably why utter bull shiters have problems with him.

[Sam Flynn]

I know you think the pinchin torso is a copycat, but with that article Joshua Rogan found I just don't think that's possible.

Whilst it's possible that the Pinchin Street killer scored the torso's abdomen to deflect the blame onto JTR, I'm not particularly sold on the idea. It was a pretty lame copy-cat attempt if that's what it was.

[Sam Flynn]

it's like 75 % you and 25 % sam bickering with you.

Page-wise, Rocky, I think you'll find that it's more like Fisherman 90%... plus. I've lost count of the number of times when I (or someone else) has written a one- or two-sentence post, only to get back a fusillade of paragraphs in response. And I'm not bickering, either. Just pointing out what I perceive are issues, and defending myself when I get flamed.

[Abby Normal]

God I love/hate you silly monkeys! LOL

[Fisherman]

Page-wise, Rocky, I think you'll find that it's more like Fisherman 90%... plus. I've lost count of the number of times when I (or someone else) has written a one- or two-sentence post, only to get back a fusillade of paragraphs in response. And I'm not bickering, either. Just pointing out what I perceive are issues, and defending myself when I get flamed.

Of course you are bickering. That is exactly what it amounts too: "He writes too long posts, bohoo", "He writes too many posts, please make him go away" and so on. That is bickering.
What else would it be?

This is a public forum. It is not your forum, and you do not make the rules for how I or anybody else choose to post. Once you try to do that, you are bickering. And you will get "flamed" for it.

It´s the exact same thing as your effort to call me biased and dub yourself the fairest and most objective poster who has ever graced the boards. It is untrue (in both respects), and waddayouknow - you get flamed for it.

Sorry about the long post. If we can now go back to the topic of the thread, it would be nice.

[Fisherman]

I checked the 20 pages between 181-200 on the thread, and found that I had made 54 posts on those pages, whereas you, Gareth, had made 21. I suppose those are the numbers from where you derive that I make 90 per cent of the posting between us?
I also noted that I was posting against many more people than you were - since many more people asked me things, discussed with me and so on.
This is further elucidated by how 14 of my 54 posts (26 %) were directed to you, while 11 of your 21 posts (52 %) were in response to me.
This means that while I have kept dealing with you in a quarter of my posts, you have spent more than half of your posting on me.

I also noticed that although I have some long posts, so have you. And I had a number of one-line posts too.

If you want me to make a word count, I could probably do that too. Just say the word.

Then again, we could also go back to the topic of the thread and discuss the case instead of making the kind of very poorly grounded and misleading posting you produced on how much we publish out here, respectively.

Once again, sorry about the length of this post. Some things take a little space to explain.

[Abby Normal]

Fish
In your opinion, what do you think links the 80s torso series with the 70s series?

[Fisherman]

Fish
In your opinion, what do you think links the 80s torso series with the 70s series?

Apart from the matter I am keeping to myself:

- the limbs were neatly disarticulated, with clean sweeps. Normally, the limbs are sawn off, and when there is disarticulation, it can be crude or skilful. It was skilful in the 1873 deed and the Tottenham deed.

-The victims were not subjected to the kind of physical torture that is often the case.

-The victims were cut up very close in time to death, as proven by the muscle contraction.

-The classical six-part dismembering scheme was not in use in any of the cases, with the possible exception of the Whitehall victim.

-The part of the torso of the 1873 victim that was found, was divided up in three sections, pelvis, abdomen and chest, just like then Rainham victim and Jackson were.

-The 1873 victim had been drained of blood, and in one of the 1880:s cases (I keep forgetting which) the doctors commented on the lack of blood in the vessels.

-The 1873 and 1874 victims were thrown in the Thames.

[Abby Normal]

Apart from the matter I am keeping to myself:

- the limbs were neatly disarticulated, with clean sweeps. Normally, the limbs are sawn off, and when there is disarticulation, it can be crude or skilful. It was skilful in the 1873 deed and the Tottenham deed.

-The victims were not subjected to the kind of physical torture that is often the case.

-The victims were cut up very close in time to death, as proven by the muscle contraction.

-The classical six-part dismembering scheme was not in use in any of the cases, with the possible exception of the Whitehall victim.

-The part of the torso of the 1873 victim that was found, was divided up in three sections, pelvis, abdomen and chest, just like then Rainham victim and Jackson were.

-The 1873 victim had been drained of blood, and in one of the 1880:s cases (I keep forgetting which) the doctors commented on the lack of blood in the vessels.

Thanks Fish
I think the three part sectioning is quite telling as is the clean disarticulation.
in the 70s series-what post mortem mutilation was done above and beyond what was needed for dismemberment?

[Fisherman]

Thanks Fish
I think the three part sectioning is quite telling as is the clean disarticulation.
in the 70s series-what post mortem mutilation was done above and beyond what was needed for dismemberment?

There were only a few parts found from the Tottenham victim, so there is no way to tell in that case.
There is way too little known about the 1874 torso to make any calls.
The only victm that we know a reasonably substantial amount of things abut is the 1873 victim, and that is largely due to the Lancet article I posted earlier.
We know that this victim was divided up in many parts, and we know that the scalp and face was cut off in one piece. Which is of course above and beyond any need caused by a wish to dismember the victim. There were at least two severe blows dealt to the right temple, which is also above and beyond. All the blood had been drained from the body, which is also unnecessary for dismemberment as such.
In the 1873 Annual Register, it is also said that "a portion of the lungs was found by Inspector Marley, of the Thames Police, under an arch of old Battersea bridge, and the other part near the Battersea railway pier."
That sounds to me as if the lung/s had been taken out of the body and cut up, but as always with these river victims, it may be that a propeller did the damage.

[Abby Normal]

There were only a few parts found from the Tottenham victim, so there is no way to tell in that case.
There is way too little known about the 1874 torso to make any calls.
The only victm that we know a reasonably substantial amount of things abut is the 1873 victim, and that is largely due to the Lancet article I posted earlier.
We know that this victim was divided up in many parts, and we know that the scalp and face was cut off in one piece. Which is of course above and beyond any need caused by a wish to dismember the victim. There were at least two severe blows dealt to the right temple, which is also above and beyond. All the blood had been drained from the body, which is also unnecessary for dismemberment as such.
In the 1873 Annual Register, it is also said that "a portion of the lungs was found by Inspector Marley, of the Thames Police, under an arch of old Battersea bridge, and the other part near the Battersea railway pier."
That sounds to me as if the lung/s had been taken out of the body and cut up, but as always with these river victims, it may be that a propeller did the damage.

Thanks Fish

Hey can you give us any idea when you might reveal that which you are holding back? as you know, I'm very interested to hear your idea!

[Fisherman]

Thanks Fish

Hey can you give us any idea when you might reveal that which you are holding back? as you know, I'm very interested to hear your idea!

Sorry, no, there is no fixed date. I am still in the process of looking for further confirmation of my ideas. Once - and if - I find that, I´m good to go. Otherwise, I don´t know.

I have no doubt that what I am onto is correct, but I have a feeling that others may doubt it for me, as it stands. I know my way around here, and so I am cautious nowadays.