Same motive = same killer

[Abby Normal]

And that's the point Harry, it's possible; just as most stuff posted on here is, that is it cannot be definitively shown to be impossible.

What we have here a vague similarities in words used to describe wounds. That's it in a nutshell.

Christer claims he has more, bit until he is ready to release or discuss such we can only work on what we have, which is not very much if we are all honest.

Yes more research is needed, preferable by a research who does not have a suspect to fit to it, human nature does terrible things to normally reasonable and objective researchers.


We will for now just have to take the theory as it stands, and wait for at the very least Christer to give us what he believes is important on the matter..

However, we could knock any page but the first out of this thread and from an evidential point of view, it would not have an discernable effect at all.


Steve

Hi El

Just off the top of my head, the drs description of the abdominal sections removed from Chapman, Kelly and Jackson all refer to it as "large flaps". Not sure if you could get any less "vague similarities" !!

I also only was alerted to the possibility to the similarities between the series via the research done by Debra Arif-similarities of post mortem mutilations of the Torso victims above and beyond what was needed for dismemberment only in general, and to the similarities specifically to the aforementioned flaps of skin removed from chapman, Kelly and Jackson.
as far as I Know, Debra is one of the most objective researchers Ive seen on here and has no "suspect to fit in".

[Fisherman]

Christer, just clarification.
Is it what you know, supported by factual evidence that is conclusive?

Or it it what you beleive to be the case, based not on conclusive fact, but on intreptation of far from clear or conclusive ?

Those are very different things, I am not asking what the issue is, just clarification on your process.



Steve

Do you think that the killer deposited a text somewhere, where he defined what his inspiration grounds were...?

No, Steve, it is a question of dreaded inerpretation. But personally, I feel sure that I am correct. It is very, very clear and all the little bits involved fit perfectly.

So itīs a given, just like the one killer suggestion.

[Trevor Marriott]

And that's the point Harry, it's possible; just as most stuff posted on here is, that is it cannot be definitively shown to be impossible.

What we have here a vague similarities in words used to describe wounds. That's it in a nutshell.

Christer claims he has more, bit until he is ready to release or discuss such we can only work on what we have, which is not very much if we are all honest.

Yes more research is needed, preferable by a research who does not have a suspect to fit to it, human nature does terrible things to normally reasonable and objective researchers.


We will for now just have to take the theory as it stands, and wait for at the very least Christer to give us what he believes is important on the matter..

However, we could knock any page but the first out of this thread and from an evidential point of view, it would not have an discernable effect at all.


Steve

And the evidence Christer and his band of followers seek to rely on regarding the so called Torso murders is without a doubt unsafe, and thats putting it mildly, so how anyone can attempt to link the two series together beggars belief.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

What we have here a vague similarities in words used to describe wounds. That's it in a nutshell.
Steve

That is not even clost to being true. We have similarities that we cannot and need not describe in detail, so we do not know how "vague" they are, in terms of apparition.

We DO know however, that Chapman, Kelly and Jackson all had their abdomens ripped completely open, all the way down, that all ot them had their uteri removed and that they all had their abdominal walls taken away in large flaps.

These are so rare damages that no realistic doubt can be entertained about the one killer suggestion. Far from being a vague possibility, it is a near certainty.

You are welcome to present any parallel case with as specific damage and two serialists involved. I can tell you that you wonīt find it - but why take it from me?

[John Wheat]

No one’s forcing you to read this thread. If you’re bored, go entertain yourself elsewhere.

I, for one, see a definite possibility that both series are connected and would love to see more research done on the matter.

I was paraphrasing Fisherman's attempt to silence those who disagree with his point of view.

[Sam Flynn]

We DO know however, that Chapman, Kelly and Jackson all had their abdomens ripped completely open, all the way down, that all ot them had their uteri removed and that they all had their abdominal walls taken away in large flaps.

Once again, THERE ARE ONLY SO MANY WAYS YOU CAN CUT OPEN AN ABDOMEN, and it's very probable that two (or more) people would independently hit upon a similar method of doing so purely by chance. Besides, the cases you cite aren't identical, and any similarity they have is, in any case, superficial:

1. Jackson - the ONLY ONE of the torso series to be so treated - had two "long slips (strips)" of flesh cut from the middle of her abdomen, which quite possibly had something to do with the fact that she was pregnant;

2. Chapman had a CHUNK of flesh removed in three flaps taken from ONE SIDE OF HER BELLY, to enable the killer to pull out her intestines and to remove her uterus and bladder;

3. Kelly had three LARGE SLABS of flesh cut from her entire abdomen, completely laying it open from flank to flank, to enable her killer to pull out her intestines and to methodically remove the entire contents of her abdomen, and (later) to cut up through her diaphragm in order to remove her heart.

These are very different approaches, and what happened to Jackson does NOT compare with what happened to Chapman and Kelly.

[Elamarna]

Hi El

Just off the top of my head, the drs description of the abdominal sections removed from Chapman, Kelly and Jackson all refer to it as "large flaps". Not sure if you could get any less "vague similarities" !!

I also only was alerted to the possibility to the similarities between the series via the research done by Debra Arif-similarities of post mortem mutilations of the Torso victims above and beyond what was needed for dismemberment only in general, and to the similarities specifically to the aforementioned flaps of skin removed from chapman, Kelly and Jackson.
as far as I Know, Debra is one of the most objective researchers Ive seen on here and has no "suspect to fit in".

That's the whole point Abby, Flaps is vague, it means different things to different people.
It's not an objective term.

If Debra ever does a book on the torsos it would possibly help. However i am far from convinced there is conclusive evidence. Maybe Christer at some stage will supply it.



STEVE

[Elamarna]

Do you think that the killer deposited a text somewhere, where he defined what his inspiration grounds were...?

No, Steve, it is a question of dreaded inerpretation. But personally, I feel sure that I am correct. It is very, very clear and all the little bits involved fit perfectly.

So itīs a given, just like the one killer suggestion.

Christer, no issue with the suggestion at all.


STEVE

[Elamarna]

That is not even clost to being true. We have similarities that we cannot and need not describe in detail, so we do not know how "vague" they are, in terms of apparition.

We DO know however, that Chapman, Kelly and Jackson all had their abdomens ripped completely open, all the way down, that all ot them had their uteri removed and that they all had their abdominal walls taken away in large flaps.

These are so rare damages that no realistic doubt can be entertained about the one killer suggestion. Far from being a vague possibility, it is a near certainty.

You are welcome to present any parallel case with as specific damage and two serialists involved. I can tell you that you wonīt find it - but why take it from me?

They are vague, not specific, Flaps or what ever term you care to use is not specific or objectively helpful.

To suggest that Jackson had the uterus removed and link it to Chapman is very simplistic .
It is certainly not possible to draw a straight parallel between the cases.

The old fall back of no two killers active at same time rolled out again. Such can be useful in analysing cases but to use it as an absolute takes such too far.


Steve

[Fisherman]

Hi Fish
I used to think that the dismemberment was just in ease in getting rid of the body from his murder hole, but now I'm not so sure.

I'm thinking more that it was part of his paraphilia.

as in-the torsorippers main motivation was the pleasure he experienced with what his knife could do, and the cutting up, mutilation and or dismemberment of the female body.

getting deeper than that though I'm less sure. was that where it ended? Or was he creating a Frankenstein monster, was he doing things with the parts ALA Gein? was he getting any sexual pleasure from it? cannibalism?

I think all these are also on the table, just not sure which ones.

thoughts, comments?

The 1873 victim had all dismembered limbs taken off by means of disarticulation - but some of the joints that are easiest to disarticulate were instead sawn through.

So the killer swopped inbetween dismemberment methods. I find that very telling. It was more than a practicality to him.

[Fisherman]

Once again, THERE ARE ONLY SO MANY WAYS YOU CAN CUT OPEN AN ABDOMEN, and it's very probable that two (or more) people would independently hit upon a similar method of doing so purely by chance. Besides, the cases you cite aren't identical, and any similarity they have is, in any case, superficial:

1. Jackson - the ONLY ONE of the torso series to be so treated - had two "long slips (strips)" of flesh cut from the middle of her abdomen, which quite possibly had something to do with the fact that she was pregnant;

2. Chapman had a CHUNK of flesh removed in three flaps taken from ONE SIDE OF HER BELLY, to enable the killer to pull out her intestines and to remove her uterus and bladder;

3. Kelly had three LARGE SLABS of flesh cut from her entire abdomen, completely laying it open from flank to flank, to enable her killer to pull out her intestines and to methodically remove the entire contents of her abdomen, and (later) to cut up through her diaphragm in order to remove her heart.

These are very different approaches, and what happened to Jackson does NOT compare with what happened to Chapman and Kelly.

Nobody words Kellys flaps "chunks". Thatīs your wording. Hebbert called Jacksons flaps "large flaps" and "strips of flesh". It is only you who consistently and conveniently "forget" on of the wordings, which is an exact replica of what Chapmans and Kellys flaps were called.

What happened to Jackson can and should be compared with Kelly and Chapman. Kelly and Chapman differed very much too inbetween them, but that does not stop you from comparing them, does it?

"There are only so many ways you can cut an abdomen"? That is tosh. There are thousands of them. nd not a single one of them is collateral damage from chopping limbs off.

[Fisherman]

That's the whole point Abby, Flaps is vague, it means different things to different people.
It's not an objective term.

If Debra ever does a book on the torsos it would possibly help. However i am far from convinced there is conclusive evidence. Maybe Christer at some stage will supply it.

STEVE

They were large flaps in all cases, and described as such.

If they were circular in one case, triangular in the second and square in the third, it would not make any difference at all. Thay would still represent the abdominal wall being taken away in large flaps and that is next to unheard of.

Therefore, it matters not how they looked. They are reliable pointers to a single killer anyway.

Please describe what shapes they would have to nullify that notion. You canīt, Iīm afraid!

[Fisherman]

To suggest that Jackson had the uterus removed and link it to Chapman is very simplistic .
Steve

It will immediately make any policeman worth his salt work from the assumption of just the one killer. You may bank on that.

Go check out how many uterus eviscerating serialists there are in the history of mankind.

And once you add the flap-taking, you enter a realm inhabited by ONE man only in late Victorian Britain.

Thatīs it. Whether you accept it or not is of smaller importance. Itīs annoying to have people deny the obvious, but life is sometimes annoying. That does not change the facts of it, though.

[Elamarna]

They were large flaps in all cases, and described as such.

If they were circular in one case, triangular in the second and square in the third, it would not make any difference at all. Thay would still represent the abdominal wall being taken away in large flaps and that is next to unheard of.

Therefore, it matters not how they looked. They are reliable pointers to a single killer anyway.

Please describe what shapes they would have to nullify that notion. You canīt, Iīm afraid!

My dear Christer
Flaps can mean anything, argue as much as you want. It matters not.

Make your suggestions, give your theories they remain just that, and because they are not impossible they remain POSSIBLE.

After all these months, not one inch of movement, not one extra shread of evidence.

Steve

[Elamarna]

It will immediately make any policeman worth his salt work from the assumption of just the one killer. You may bank on that.

Go check out how many uterus eviscerating serialists there are in the history of mankind.

And once you add the flap-taking, you enter a realm inhabited by ONE man only in late Victorian Britain.

Thatīs it. Whether you accept it or not is of smaller importance. Itīs annoying to have people deny the obvious, but life is sometimes annoying. That does not change the facts of it, though.

It's equally annoying to have people put forward ideas and claim there is no alternative. But as you say that's life.


Steve