Same motive = same killer

[Sam Flynn]

Sam
Both series have extensive post mortem mutilations, including mtilations well above and beyond what was needed for just dismemberment in the torso case, including cutting The abdomen horizontally, removal of internal organs, and cutting away flesh of the stomach in flaps.

You're generalising, Abby. Only one of the torso cases had their abdominal flesh removed in strips and their internal organs removed; just one of them. As I've said before, we need to be precise. Slack writing leads to slack thinking.

Re "including cutting The abdomen horizontally" - well, if you're going to chop someone up so you can dump their bits in various places, you're going to have to do something like that, aren't you?

[Sam Flynn]

More than two perpetrators in either series?

Of course. A case can be made that Stride was not killed by JTR, and that argument is by no means an unreasonable one. Similarly, it is by no means certain that ALL the torso murders were committed by the same person, or indeed that an individual torso murder couldn't have been committed by more than one person working together.

That’s laughable sam, and you lose all credibility with ridiculous statements like this.

That's insulting and completely untrue. What I said was not in the least bit "laughable" and I made no "ridiculous statement" at all; on the contrary, what I said was - and remains - perfectly sensible.

[Fisherman]

That's garbage if thats your attitude then you might as well conclude that Chapman was the Ripper and the Torso killer.

That´s not a very good argument though, is it, John? You have an unpleasant and unueseful tendency to name things you dislike "garbage".

Tell me, how can it be "garbage" to agree with how modern police forces do their job - accepting that similaritites point to the same killer? Why is that "garbage"?

For the record, I have not put any person at all forward as the combined Torso killer/Ripper in this discussion. Chapman was put forward by Gordon, and his argument is not a bad one at all. Personally, I link the 1873 murder to the rest, and that´s goodbye George for me.

[Fisherman]

The trouble with the Thames torso murders is if the killer murdered in that fashion in a safe bolt hole why take the risk of going out onto the streets ? We know the murders spanned either side of JTR if it was one perpetrator he took enormous risks by changing his MO. Lets look at the C5, Polly, almost caught in the act. Annie, took a large risk in a backyard overlooked in almost daylight. Liz, very nearly caught in the act, and you could argue the same with Kate. Mary is the only one with a little bit of safety involved, and even that murder came with large risks, someone looking through the broken pane etc. If i was the killer after almost being caught/interrupted after Polly i would go back to my tried and trusted method.

I think that the questions like "why leave a safe bolthole" needs to wait to be answered until we have the answer to "how can murders in BOTH series involve so many very specific and rare elements without being linked by the same man?"

As I keep saying, the perceived dissimilaritites can all be explained, The similarities can too: they are there on account of the same killer being responsible.

Are we really to believe that two killers overlapped timewise and geographically, cutting bellies open from sternum to pelvis, taking out uteri, taking away the abdominal wall in large flaps,cutting necks...? That just does not pan out.

We are quite aware today that serialists have a tendency to become more flamboyant and less careful as they progress. That could be the explanation to why a killer took his work to the streets. it really is not a very hard thing to overcome.

[Fisherman]

This is the crux of the debate for me Gareth. It’s simply not believable

And yet, the explanation of an increasing boldness is so very readily at hand. It may also be that alcohol could have played a role.

How is that in any way unsurmountable...?

[Fisherman]

The post-mortem mutilation of the torso victims was done in conjunction with chopping them into pieces, not as an end in itself.

How is cutting the abdomen from sternum to pelvis something that comes about as part of chopping a body to pieces?

How is taking out the uterus, the cord and placenta and taking away parts of the abdominal wall to wrap them in part of chopping a body to pieces?

How is meticulously cutting away a face, eyelashes and lips included, part of a quick chopping up a body in pieces?

And after suggesting tis, YOU tell us to be "precise"?

The truth is that we cannot be precise. We do not know precisely how the damage in each case looked. All we know is that there are similaritites involving extremely odd and unusual measures.

That´s how precise we need to be.

Why does the suggestion of a conmon killer evoke this much fear and desperation? Why must it be denied at any price, come what may? Just join forces with any modern police force and do it their way, and you will be safely guided into the only sane stance on the issue, Gareth.

[Fisherman]

No, just precise.

Whilst we see some "post mortem mutilations" in the JTR murders, what we see in the torso series is "dismemberment", not "mutilation".

The Torso killer cut the abdomen of Jackson from sternum to pelvis, took out Jacksons uterus, the cord and the placenta, cut away the abdominal wall in sections and removed the lungs and the heart from the chest.

Since when is that not mutilating? Just how do you reason to turn that into mere dismembering?

The discussion will never become truthful as long as we are not able to accept simple facts. The above described facts are examples of a very extensive amount of mutilation and evisceration. As I said, for the longest, it was not known that this was the case, but once it has come out and been described, backed by Hebbert, it cannot be flatly denied.

By all means, say that you think there were two mutilators and eviscerators, if you feel like it. But don´t try to say that the Torso killer was not a mutilator and eviscerator. He was and it is a proven thing.

[Fisherman]

The problem I see with this is that the Ripper murders were confined to such a small area -- almost as though the Ripper lacked mobility.

If both series were committed by the same person, then he/she had access to a safe location, the means to purchase the tools necessary to dismember bodies, and the means to move about the city in a much larger area. So WHY would the Ripper victims be confined to such a tiny, tiny area?

curious

It´s not all THAT tiny - he did not kill in a shoebox. The distance as the crow flies from Durward Street to Mitre Square is about a mile, and a square mile of Whitechapel would involve hundreds of streets. I sometimes think the area is described as very minimal whereas it is not really all that small.

The reason for the Ripper using such a smallish (admittedly) area can be that he lived there, worked there, had reason to visit there, etcetera.

Why the body parts from the Torso murders were not dumped there is another matter. But just as is the case with any deviation, as long as there can be an explanation (and there can be many in this case), we forst need to explain why the murder series involved very odd and unusual common elements. That does not go away because there are dissimilarities!

[Fisherman]

You're generalising, Abby. Only one of the torso cases had their abdominal flesh removed in strips and their internal organs removed; just one of them. As I've said before, we need to be precise. Slack writing leads to slack thinking.

Re "including cutting The abdomen horizontally" - well, if you're going to chop someone up so you can dump their bits in various places, you're going to have to do something like that, aren't you?

But Abby never said that two or more of the torso cases involved these matters, did he, Gareth? He said that there are common elements within the series, and that is perfectly correct, as has been abundantly shown.

What precise explanation do you have for it? "It just happened to be that way by chance"? Or?

Once you acknowledge that cutting out the uterus and taking away the abdominal wall in large flaps is mutilation and evisceration, you have a lot of questions to answer. How do those answers look, Gareth?

[Abby Normal]

You're generalising, Abby. Only one of the torso cases had their abdominal flesh removed in strips and their internal organs removed; just one of them. As I've said before, we need to be precise. Slack writing leads to slack thinking.

Re "including cutting The abdomen horizontally" - well, if you're going to chop someone up so you can dump their bits in various places, you're going to have to do something like that, aren't you?

Sam
All the torsos had post mortem mutilations to the abdomen, all above and beyond what was needed to dismember them. The abdominal flaps removed from Jackson is what links the series. Every ripper victim had differences in their wounds, so we do we ascribe different killers for each victim.?

And I meant to say vertical cut. Sorry my bad!

[Abby Normal]

You're generalising, Abby. Only one of the torso cases had their abdominal flesh removed in strips and their internal organs removed; just one of them. As I've said before, we need to be precise. Slack writing leads to slack thinking.

Re "including cutting The abdomen horizontally" - well, if you're going to chop someone up so you can dump their bits in various places, you're going to have to do something like that, aren't you?

Sam
The abdominal strips removed from Jackson is what links the two series. Even in the ripper case not exactly the same thing is done to all victims. There fore do we assign a different killer for each victim?

All the torsos had post mortem mutilation to the abdomen well above and beyond just dismemberment.

And sorry I meant to say vertical. My bad!

[Fisherman]

Of course. A case can be made that Stride was not killed by JTR, and that argument is by no means an unreasonable one. Similarly, it is by no means certain that ALL the torso murders were committed by the same person, or indeed that an individual torso murder couldn't have been committed by more than one person working together.
That's insulting and completely untrue. What I said was not in the least bit "laughable" and I made no "ridiculous statement" at all; on the contrary, what I said was - and remains - perfectly sensible.

Yes, it is true that philosophically speaking all murders in the two series may have had different originators.

But just how likely is it?

Some little afterthought may be required here.

Why do you think that Nichols and Chapman were killed by the same man?

Outside of the time and space factor, you presumably base that on the damage done.

Nichols had her neck cut down to the bone.

Chapman had her neck cut down to the bone.

Nichols had her abdomen ripped open.

Chapman had her abdomen ripped open.

That´s it, right?

Nichols does not compare to Chapman when it comes to organ retrieval, though.

But Liz Jackson does! She, just like Chapman, had her uterus removed.

She, just like Chapman had her abdomen ripped open.

She, just like Chapman had her abdominal wall cut away in flaps.

She, just like Chapman, had her neck sliced down to the bone - and beyond.

So in fact, Chapman and Jackson have MORE in common than Nichols and Chapman.

You may argue that we don´t know that Jackson had her neck cut in the same exact fashion as Chapman. But then again, cut necks are not all that unusual.

Uterus removal, though, IS very unusual. And removal of the abdominal wall in sections is even more rare.

So Chapman and Jackson are the twin sisters here, and Nichols is the odd one out.

Any thoughts about that, Gareth? The damage speaks for itself, does it not?

[Abby Normal]

The problem I see with this is that the Ripper murders were confined to such a small area -- almost as though the Ripper lacked mobility.

If both series were committed by the same person, then he/she had access to a safe location, the means to purchase the tools necessary to dismember bodies, and the means to move about the city in a much larger area. So WHY would the Ripper victims be confined to such a tiny, tiny area?

curious

Hi curious
Yup. I have a problem with it too. You might expect to see the ripper victims more overlap in area with the torso victims.

But what if his murder hole is to the west and he lives in the east?

[Fisherman]

Sam
The abdominal strips removed from Jackson is what links the two series. Even in the ripper case not exactly the same thing is done to all victims. There fore do we assign a different killer for each victim?

All the torsos had post mortem mutilation to the abdomen well above and beyond just dismemberment.

And sorry I meant to say vertical. My bad!

I would avoid falling into the trap of calling the abdominal flesh "strips", Abby - it is Gareths chosen option since the word was used. However, Hebbert ALSO describe them as "large flaps", EXACTLY the same wording that is used in Chapmans and Kellys case. In those cases, it may well be that the word "strips" could have applied equally. We simply don´t know.

In conclusion:

Jacksons removed abdominal meat is decribed as "large flaps" and as "strips".

Chapman and Kellys removed abdominal meat is only described as "large flaps", the exact same wording used about Jacksons removed abdominal meat in one of the passages by Hebbert.

As you know and have been adviced, we must be precise about these matters!

[Abby Normal]

Of course. A case can be made that Stride was not killed by JTR, and that argument is by no means an unreasonable one. Similarly, it is by no means certain that ALL the torso murders were committed by the same person, or indeed that an individual torso murder couldn't have been committed by more than one person working together.
That's insulting and completely untrue. What I said was not in the least bit "laughable" and I made no "ridiculous statement" at all; on the contrary, what I said was - and remains - perfectly sensible.

Sorry sam
To say that there is at least three people, which means more than two, like you said, in either series is laughable.

Even if we narrow it down to the canonical five. At least three different killers? Cmon sam.