Same motive = same killer

[Sam Flynn]

Of course, you`re forgetting the attack on McKenzie.

A highly dubious Ripper victim. Besides, one isolated murder does not a flurry make.

[Elamarna]

And now YOU are doing it too...? The time overlap is a mere secondary matter. If the deeds had not had so many commonalities, we would not be discussing a connection at all. THAT is where the true linking possibility lies.
Reasoning that the time issue is the clincher, we need to include any murder within that time span as linked, regardless of the character of the deed, and that would be utter folly.

My Dear Christer,

The arguments you make, while interesting, do not it appears convince all. And it appears that you find such annoying or frustrating..
I and others have listed in detail the reasons why we do not feel these issues are significant, you do not accept those arguments, that's fine.

We all look at the same evidence and then come to different conclusions.


Steve

[Sam Flynn]

Yes, possibly temporary.
East End favourites alcoholism and syphillis will do that

Is there no end to the number of excuses that need to be made in order to stop an inconvenient fact getting in the way of a preconceived conclusion?

[Jon Guy]

A highly dubious Ripper victim. Besides, one isolated murder does not a flurry make.

In your opinion.

But you posed the question yourself, along the lines of if the Ripper, why didn`t McKenzie`s killer push the knife in a little deeper to open the stomach cavity.
Remember Sadler, who was acquitted because they thought he was too drunk to hold the knife steadily enough to produce the injury Coles received.

[Sam Flynn]

In your opinion.

Not at all. That McKenzie is doubted as a Ripper victim, and that she was not killed during a flurry of similar murders, are both objective facts.

[Darryl Kenyon]

From a dissection on this site by Gerald Spicer - The river Thames has long been the end of the road for suicidal lunatics, victims of crime, and those involved in unfortunate accidents. Parliamentary returns for 1882 record that 544 corpses were found in the Thames, of which 277 cases resulted in open verdicts.
The London Times, ran an article on June 15 of that year entitled "Undetected Murders," pointing out that "the facilities afforded by the river for the perpetration of secret murders" was one that need to be addressed. "It is not a pleasant thing to reflect that there may be many ruffians prowling about London who have already committed riverside outrages with impunity, and may be tempted to commit others owing to the general laxity that prevails in our arrangement for ascertaining the causes of suspicious deaths."

From Rainham to Battersea is 20 miles, [and two years between the victims] IE A large stretch of the Thames would it really be unlikely to see a victim,over that time span and distance, when we don't know why they where a victim, was one or more a ritualistic killing like the Thames torso boy of a few years back, one of the victims could have been the result of a domestic where the killer had to cut up and get rid of the body, note the lack of heads as if to stop any identification, perhaps left in a more secure place, or one or more victims could be an operation in a back street surgery gone wrong, or it could be Jack, we simply don't know. But what seems reasonable is the Thames seems to be a perfect place to get rid of a body, and if we argue that not all the bodies where found in or near the river why didn't the killer, if it is indeed one killer why did he not leave all the corpses in the water rather than on land. I am not completely discounting Jack for all the bodies, just making a few thoughts of mine.

[Jon Guy]

Not at all. That McKenzie is doubted as a Ripper victim, and that she was not killed during a flurry of similar murders, are both objective facts.

Yes, I suppose, and Tabram, Stride, Eddowes and Kelly were all doubted too

[Sam Flynn]

Yes, I suppose, and Tabram, Stride, Eddowes and Kelly were all doubted too

Nowhere near to the extent that McKenzie was, and still is, Tabram excepted. And, again, McKenzie wasn't killed during a spree of similar murders, either.

Objective facts, whether you like it or not.

[Jon Guy]

Nowhere near to the extent that McKenzie was, and still is, Tabram excepted. And, again, McKenzie wasn't killed during a spree of similar murders, either.

Objective facts, whether you like it or not.

Yes, we`re all ware that McKenzie was not killed in a flurry of murders, I was referring to your opinion on it been highly dubious that she was killed by the Ripper.

We don`t know who the Ripper killed, so measuring the extent of how dubious the author of a particular murder is not a fact, but an opinion. Your opinion.

It`s a fact that Dr Bond thought it was another Ripper murder.
Even Phillips, who disagreed, saw many similarities and went as far to admit as much. That`s a fact too.

[Sam Flynn]

Yes, we`re all ware that McKenzie was not killed in a flurry of murders, I was referring to your opinion on it been highly dubious that she was killed by the Ripper.

It's not just "my opinion" that McKenzie is a dubious Ripper victim. Many people, at the time and since, doubt that she was, too. That is a simple fact.

[Trevor Marriott]

Good!

Here´s my question:

Dr Biggs! Are you of the opinion that dismemberment murder cases led on by a deeply rooted psychological urge within the killer to cut into a body are likely to produce other results than dismemberment cases where the sole reason for the dismemberment is a wish to conceal the identity of the victim or facilitate the disposal of the remains?

I think that question would be better answer by a criminal psychologist and not a forensic pathologist like Dr Biggs who deals with medical issues

I have set out below yet again some extracts from Dr Biggs assesemnt and evaluation of the facts surrounding these torsos

"Despite there being apparently a lot of information about these torsos, there is actually little pathological information to determine how they died (or when) so I can’t shed any light on that side of things, I’m afraid. Dismemberment isn’t that uncommon, and when it is seen it is usually (but not always!) the result of an attempt to conceal a homicide. Abortionists tended not to worry so much about concealing the fact that death occurred, but just made themselves scarce, so they couldn’t be linked to the woman after she was found (intact). However, I guess that if they carried out the abortions within their own property and the victims died, then I can understand the need to dispose of the body by dismemberment.

Dr Biggs was also asked a question re the comparisons between Kelly and Jackson. two who you link to the same killer,

Q. You have perused the post mortem reports from both the Kelly Murder and Elizabeth Jackson whose body is believed to have been one of the Thames Torsos. In your professional opinion are there any comparisons, which you can see which might indicate that they were killed and mutilated by the same person? In particular the doctors reports which mention flaps of skin being removed in both cases.

A. I don't think the removal of 'flaps' of tissue can be taken as evidence of a 'signature' of the killer. By signature, I am including both the intentional (i.e. 'calling card') and unintentional (habit, MO) interpretations of the word. Essentially, these two individuals could have been killed by the same person, or by different individuals. There is no way of telling one scenario from the other based purely on the pattern of body dismemberment.

"A person who is faced with a body to dispose of will often attempt to 'chop it up', either to make it easier to hide, easier to transport or easier to 'get rid of' in some way. What is quite striking is that even individuals with no prior knowledge will often end up doing a job that will look remarkably similar (in appearance afterwards) to that of another, completely unrelated case. It is not the presence of a common killer that is responsible for the similarities between cases, but the fact that bodies tend to have fairly obvious 'joins' to go for when attempting to reduce the size / bulk of a body.

"Put simply, the pattern of removing the head and limbs from the torso +/- splitting the torso in half seems to be fairly 'normal' in cases of dismemberment. The handful of dismemberment cases that I have personally dealt with in my short career so far have all ended up looking fairly similar, but I would never have tried to claim that this represented some sort of common link between cases"
[/I][/B]

I hope reading this again will bring you to your senses and make you abandon this misguided belife that all the torsos were the work of a killer and that killer murdered the Whitechapel women.

There really is no more to say on the topic. Your own medical opinions, you base you theory on clearly do not stand up to scrutiny and are not in line with 21st Century medical experts opinions. So who do we believe ?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

I think that question would be better answer by a criminal psychologist and not a forensic pathologist like Dr Biggs who deals with medical issues

I have set out below yet again some extracts from Dr Biggs assesemnt and evaluation of the facts surrounding these torsos

"Despite there being apparently a lot of information about these torsos, there is actually little pathological information to determine how they died (or when) so I can’t shed any light on that side of things, I’m afraid. Dismemberment isn’t that uncommon, and when it is seen it is usually (but not always!) the result of an attempt to conceal a homicide. Abortionists tended not to worry so much about concealing the fact that death occurred, but just made themselves scarce, so they couldn’t be linked to the woman after she was found (intact). However, I guess that if they carried out the abortions within their own property and the victims died, then I can understand the need to dispose of the body by dismemberment.

Dr Biggs was also asked a question re the comparisons between Kelly and Jackson. two who you link to the same killer,

Q. You have perused the post mortem reports from both the Kelly Murder and Elizabeth Jackson whose body is believed to have been one of the Thames Torsos. In your professional opinion are there any comparisons, which you can see which might indicate that they were killed and mutilated by the same person? In particular the doctors reports which mention flaps of skin being removed in both cases.

A. I don't think the removal of 'flaps' of tissue can be taken as evidence of a 'signature' of the killer. By signature, I am including both the intentional (i.e. 'calling card') and unintentional (habit, MO) interpretations of the word. Essentially, these two individuals could have been killed by the same person, or by different individuals. There is no way of telling one scenario from the other based purely on the pattern of body dismemberment.

"A person who is faced with a body to dispose of will often attempt to 'chop it up', either to make it easier to hide, easier to transport or easier to 'get rid of' in some way. What is quite striking is that even individuals with no prior knowledge will often end up doing a job that will look remarkably similar (in appearance afterwards) to that of another, completely unrelated case. It is not the presence of a common killer that is responsible for the similarities between cases, but the fact that bodies tend to have fairly obvious 'joins' to go for when attempting to reduce the size / bulk of a body.

"Put simply, the pattern of removing the head and limbs from the torso +/- splitting the torso in half seems to be fairly 'normal' in cases of dismemberment. The handful of dismemberment cases that I have personally dealt with in my short career so far have all ended up looking fairly similar, but I would never have tried to claim that this represented some sort of common link between cases"
[/I][/B]

I hope reading this again will bring you to your senses and make you abandon this misguided belife that all the torsos were the work of a killer and that killer murdered the Whitechapel women.

There really is no more to say on the topic. Your own medical opinions, you base you theory on clearly do not stand up to scrutiny and are not in line with 21st Century medical experts opinions. So who do we believe ?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

A forensic pathologist would be eminently suited to answer the question, Trevor, so ask away, please. The worst thing that can happen is that he says he has no idea.

[Fisherman]

My Dear Christer,

The arguments you make, while interesting, do not it appears convince all. And it appears that you find such annoying or frustrating..
I and others have listed in detail the reasons why we do not feel these issues are significant, you do not accept those arguments, that's fine.

We all look at the same evidence and then come to different conclusions.

Steve

... yes, and then you get all moralistic when I tell you it´s farcical. Everybody KNOWS that the time factor only comes into play if there are similarities between deeds. Everybody. Let´s not pretend otherwise.

[Elamarna]

... yes, and then you get all moralistic when I tell you it´s farcical. Everybody KNOWS that the time factor only comes into play if there are similarities between deeds. Everybody. Let´s not pretend otherwise.

Again I am not sure what your issue is?

I said if I remember that the timing issue raised the possability of a link,.

However I said so many times I do not think the other similarities are significant at all.


Hence I see no significant link between the Torso and Whitechapel deaths.

Why do you have an issue with that?

However the post you replied to made no reference to dates at all!






Steve

[Fisherman]

Again I am not sure what your issue is?

I said if I remember that the timing issue raised the possability of a link,.

However I said so many times I do not think the other similarities are significant at all.

Hence I see no significant link between the Torso and Whitechapel deaths.

Why do you have an issue with that?

Steve

I have an issue with those who think that the time issue is the primary link for a connection. If you do not think that, but only seemed to do so, then I have no issue with it whatsoever.