Same motive = same killer

[Fisherman]

Fisherman, Abby. I'm uncertain; the general options seem to be: familiar, common or social. Familiar being, this Torso Killer and Jack the Ripper are one and the same; common being, they knew each other; and, social being, each killer was a stranger to the other(s). Considering that I would have questioned the Torso Killer about the Autumn of Terror murders if he had been apprehended, I have no issues/problems with noticing similarities; some have that "" factor. So, Fish, to your list in #3293, I might add: Jackson's "missing wedding ring" [Chapman] and those random cuts on the back of Pinchin St victim's hand/wrist area [Kelly]. I also thought the albeit-brief mention of the lack of sexual assault in either case was interesting/"possibly telling".

I don't know if the following hold any relevance but they are curiosities to me:
1. Did this Torso Killer stop around the same time as Jack the Ripper? iow if they were independent of each other, should more dismembered body parts have been expected to be found through the early 90s?
2. Theres been call for serial killers that provide contradictory examples to the "one and the same" assertion. The thing I noticed about those mentioned is that they had usually been caught or their identity discovered. Is it too random to believe that two sets of killers could have alluded the Metro's investigations without either ever providing an opportunity or clue leading to their apprehension?

I have mentioned the rings before, but thanks for reminding me. Yes, they are very interesting in the mix. So is the lack of sexual activity evidence, something i have also pointed to recently. The cuts seem more of a very possible coincidence to me.

The last (normally) accepted torso killing was in september of 89. The last (often) accepted Ripper murder was MacKenzie in the summer of the same year.
So that makes for a close finish - but once we are dealing with unapprehended killers, we must leave learoom for other murders. So it tells us very little.

When you ask: "Is it too random to believe that two sets of killers could have alluded the Metro's investigations without either ever providing an opportunity or clue leading to their apprehension?", do you mean that there was possibly to killers mimicking each other?

If so, yes, since anything is possible, it cannot be ruled out 100 per cent. But from the material we have at hand, it would take that the mimicking went in both directions. Either way, it is very much more unlikely than the one killer theory.

[Fisherman]

I'm talking about percentages within each series, Gary. 4 out of 5 canonical Ripper victims disembowelled, as compared to only 2 out of however many torso victims you include in your Canon. 100% of the torso victims were dismembered, as opposed to 0% of the Ripper victims. And so forth.

To begin with, you did not refer to the dismemberments in your previous post. You instead referred to the eviscerations and mutilation as being occasional in one series and frequent in the other. So let´s have a look at that!

1. Jackson - eviscerated.
2. The Rainham victim - heart and lungs missing, may well have been the killers work
3. The Whitehall victim - "organs missing", f ex the uterus, may well have been the killers work.

Three out of four possibles within the 1887-89 series. 75 per cent.

1. Chapman - eviscerated.
2. Eddowes - eviscerated.
3. Kelly - eviscerated.

Three out of the canonical five. 60 per cent.

It all boils down to how we look at the evidence.

As for dismemberments, we seem to all agree that they took place when the killer had a saw and a secluded locality to work in.

How hard can it be? How hard can we make it out to be?

And how does any of these things change the similarities? They are nothing but suggestions of how it MAY be that the differences point away from a single killer. May.

Once we read up on the similarities, their numbers and character, that "may" quickly changes into a "can reasonably not".

Stop stacking differences. Produce a single parallel case with as many and unusual traits. If you can´t, then there you are. You are welcome to use single murders too, it does not have to be serial killings. Anything you can contribute is of interest.

[Fisherman]

Gareth, you have said a lot about the Wikipedia, but nothing at all about the Huffington Post article, where a team of scientists researching murder states that 1 out of 500 homicides only involve mutilation or dismemberment.

How does this figure affect your thinking on the case at hand?

To me, it further underlines how very unusual dismemberment killers and mutilators are. The Ripper and the Torso killer both fall into this categorization. And of course, we know that out of all the dismemberment murders there are - and there are not many - the absolute majority are practical dismemberment murders, involving no evisceration and mutilation, but instead a quick and normally rough dividing of the torso, limbs and head.

[Fisherman]

To make good for my heinous crime of accepting the Wikipedia article, I made a search for serial killer numbers, and found this on the World Atlas website:
1 United States 2,743
2 England 145
3 South Africa 112
4 Canada 101
5 Italy 94
6 Japan 91
7 Germany 75
8 Australia 75
9 Russia 70
10 India 65

This includes all the serial murder series listed, including the 19:th century murders.

I made another search to try and find the source, and it was stated on another site that the material derives from an 2105 study made by the Radford university.

I will not guarantee the correctness of this information, I will just say that I think it looks to be on the money.

If so, we have 145 serial murder cases in Britain throughout. Whether two of them took place in the same city and at the same time, involved instances of mutilation and evisceration and involved at least ten similarities inbetween the victims, some of them very unusual and peculiar, is quite a different matter - and very, very, very unlikely.

[Harry D]

I don’t know enough about her. Could you provide details or point me in right direction.

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/rn-beadmore.html

[Abby Normal]

http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/rn-beadmore.html

Hi harry
This is the classic weak minded individual copy cat. Where some weak minded individual is influenced by a murder and does something similar. Not necessarily intentionally trying to make it similar in order to deflect suspicion.

And then there’s the obvious that it took place outside of London and the killer is known as is his motive.

[Abby Normal]

Fisherman, Abby. I'm uncertain; the general options seem to be: familiar, common or social. Familiar being, this Torso Killer and Jack the Ripper are one and the same; common being, they knew each other; and, social being, each killer was a stranger to the other(s). Considering that I would have questioned the Torso Killer about the Autumn of Terror murders if he had been apprehended, I have no issues/problems with noticing similarities; some have that "" factor. So, Fish, to your list in #3293, I might add: Jackson's "missing wedding ring" [Chapman] and those random cuts on the back of Pinchin St victim's hand/wrist area [Kelly]. I also thought the albeit-brief mention of the lack of sexual assault in either case was interesting/"possibly telling".

I don't know if the following hold any relevance but they are curiosities to me:
1. Did this Torso Killer stop around the same time as Jack the Ripper? iow if they were independent of each other, should more dismembered body parts have been expected to be found through the early 90s?
2. Theres been call for serial killers that provide contradictory examples to the "one and the same" assertion. The thing I noticed about those mentioned is that they had usually been caught or their identity discovered. Is it too random to believe that two sets of killers could have alluded the Metro's investigations without either ever providing an opportunity or clue leading to their apprehension?

Good post devil.
Not only lack of sexual assault, but lack of any overt signs of torture. Everything seems to be directed post mortem in both series.

RE 1: IMHO they did. Mackenzie and pinchin in autumn of 89. There’s no doubt in my mind that either were part of their respective series. I’ve often brought up this point of the two series ending roughly the same time and I think it’s highly relevant and another similarity. Too many coincidences for me.

RE 2: again often overlooked or poo pooed away. IMHO it’s another too much of a coincidence that both were unsolved and both killers were smart enough not to get caught.

To me there are two dissimilarities between ripper and torso. Dismemberment and disposal. And there’s about a dozen similarities, already listed before.

And of course they have been dubbed different names, so I see a set in stone mindset also, which is hard to overcome. Kind of like the MM and the ideas that got set in stone because of that.

[Sam Flynn]

IMHO it’s another too much of a coincidence that both were unsolved and both killers were smart enough not to get caught.

What about the half-a-dozen murderers who were also smart enough not to get caught in the other cases I mentioned - Smith, Tabram et al? And those, let's not forget, were confined to the East End; heaven knows how many were "getting away with murder" all over London.

[Abby Normal]

What about the half-a-dozen murderers who were also smart enough not to get caught in the other cases I mentioned - Smith, Tabram et al? And those, let's not forget, were confined to the East End; heaven knows how many were "getting away with murder" all over London.

What about them? Tabram was probably a ripper victim.
And I was talking about two series of murders

[Sam Flynn]

What about them? Tabram was probably a ripper victim.

She probably wasn't; her killer was a stabber, not a ripper. Even if she was, we still have to account for Smith, Coles, McKenzie, Mylett, etc.

And I was talking about two series of murders

You were talking about the significance of the perpetrators not being caught. I'm just pointing out that we can't read any significance into this, because several murderers weren't caught in the East End alone, in the space of only a couple of years.

In other words, "not being caught" is not good enough to link two series to one killer - if for no other reason than it reflects more on the competency of the police and the difficulty of policing at that time than it does on the abilities of the killers.

[Robert St Devil]

Careful, Flynn - bunching all those names together and you're liable for throwing a 3rd serial killer in the mix: Jack Jr. the Jabber ha Abby caught on to my second question. I haven't considered mimicry yet; and yes, the questions were more speculative than statistical, I confess. It was asked two-fold: 1) the police never discovered a good lead or a solid clue; and 2) the killers (and their respective parties) never offered a good lead or solid clue over a series of unresolved [possible] murders. I get the one-offer who gets away with murder, but these were series of occurrences which should have increased some likelihood for detection. Instead we're left with this possibility of two serial killers who share the common characterstic of being clever, cunning, lucky s.o.b. who had complete control, not over only the murders but also anyone "in the know" from ever coming forward and bearing witness against him/her/them. If you and I are serial killers in London 88, what's the likelihood we both don't get caught because we're both super stealthy and we both can keep our family, friends & enemies from squaking/squealing?
The police seemed to be on their game; it wasn't taking them long to apprehend the guilty; eg. I don't remember it taking very long to determine who killed Jane Beadmore, few days I think. If her killer was mimicking Jack the Ripper, then he sucked at it because he got caught, which is what I would expect would happen in most cases of mimicry.

[Sam Flynn]

If you and I are serial killers in London 88, what's the likelihood we both don't get caught because we're both super stealthy and we both can keep our family, friends & enemies from squaking/squealing?

I lived in London during the 1980s and 1990s, Robert, and it was pretty easy to be anonymous even then. I had no family in London, and my friends lived in different digs to me.

The police seemed to be on their game; it wasn't taking them long to apprehend the guilty.

Were they really on their game? When did they apprehend the killers of Tabram, Smith, Mylett, McKenzie, Coles, et al?


All that aside, I really don't think this has much to do with the subject of this thread.

[Fisherman]

I lived in London during the 1980s and 1990s, Robert, and it was pretty easy to be anonymous even then. I had no family in London, and my friends lived in different digs to me.
Were they really on their game? When did they apprehend the killers of Tabram, Smith, Mylett, McKenzie, Coles, et al?


All that aside, I really don't think this has much to do with the subject of this thread.

Somebody has said that there is no place on earth where it is easier to be anonymous than in a large town.

And no, the police were not on their game always.

That said, it is of course a similarity that neither killer was apprehended in spite of huge efforts being launched to do so.

[Sam Flynn]

That said, it is of course a similarity that neither killer was apprehended in spite of huge efforts being launched to do so.

I'm not sure that huge efforts were put into tracking down the perpetrator(s) of the torso cases, Fish, as they were never remotely in the same league as the Ripper murders - whether in terms of public, police or press interest.

Apart from that, it remains the case that the killers of the non-canonical Whitechapel victims were never caught, and it's almost certain that not all of them fell to the Ripper's or the torso killers' hands.

Given that a number of people seem to have found it quite easy to get away with murder in those pre-bloodhound, pre-fingerprinting days, the fact that these particular killers were not apprehended can't be a significant factor at all.

[John Wheat]

That said, it is of course a similarity that neither killer was apprehended in spite of huge efforts being launched to do so.

What a ridiculous thing to say. How is it a similarity that neither killer was apprehended? By your logic any unsolved murder would be similar. Also the resources put into catching The Torso Killer were clearly not nearly as great as those put into catching Jack.