Same motive = same killer

[Abby Normal]

The limbs that were more difficult and complicated to disjoint, that is to say the knee, foot and elbow joints (but for the left arm that was left untouched) were disjointed on the 1873 victim.
The limbs that were toughest to saw off (the thighs and the arms up at the shoulders) were sawn off.

If he had done it the other way, it would nevertheless be odd - killers will choose just the one method, normally. But he did it in the hardest way possible.

That is telling, to my mind.

Was he showing off? Or the parts he disjointed he didn’t want them damaged because he was using those parts for something?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Unless the building was erected from thin air (and there are admittedly a lot of things being built out of thin air these days), I think we must assume that building material was transported to the site.

So we could be looking for someone who delivers, say....a carman

[RockySullivan]

Fish, I'm really starting to lose faith in your reading comprehension. You said the Danish killer dismembered and weighed body parts down, one part got lose and led to the discovery of the rest. This is a great example of a failed attempted at dumping a body while preventing identification. And that is why the torsos were dismembered and dispersed, not because the killer wanted people to find them.

A shovel would solve that problem. A sack and a few stones would solve that problem. A bonfire would solve that problem.

Are you serious Fish? And if you live in the middle of London where do you go with a shovel and bury a body? You just gonna mosey around with a shovel and a torso til you find a good plot of land and dig for an hour? A sack with a stones? You describing your balls there? What you just gonna carry that sack with stones and a dead body down to the Thames and dump it in? Nobody will notice. A bonfire? In your backyard perhaps, you going to burn an entire body yea? What are you thinking?

The parts were packaged as a disguise while the killer carried the parts until they could be dumped, not as a gift for those who found them.

[Fisherman]

If you are out there, Jerry, I hope you have noted when the news about the 1873 torso deed broke: On September 8...

...but she was killed on the 5:th, going by the signs of things.

Just thought you´d like that information.

[Fisherman]

Was he showing off? Or the parts he disjointed he didn’t want them damaged because he was using those parts for something?

No, he was not showing off, he was creating. He could not care less about the lower parts of the limbs, whereas the upper parts of them were crucial.

That MY personal take, folks, unload the guns!

[Sam Flynn]

For me, had a reason for choosing that site.

On that specific point, he may have hoped that, given the nature of the location, the evidence stood a good chance of being built over. If so, whoever dumped the torso wouldn't be the last, and probably not the first, to have tried such a tactic.

[Sam Flynn]

The parts were packaged as a disguise while the killer carried the parts until they could be dumped, not as a gift for those who found them.

Very well put, and almost certainly correct.

[Abby Normal]

Right and if the killer wanted a torso to be found why hide it deep in the vault and bury parts? I think it's more likely the killer was familiar with the dump site than he parts were put there as a **** you to Scotland Yard.

Hi rocky
To me the torso dumping is overlap of MO and sig, meaning Patially for ease in disposal of getting the body/parts out of his house and also because the display factor also was meaningful to him and gave him some sort of satisfaction (in addition to the primary sig/motivation of post mortem mutilation and removal of body parts).

Parts in the Shelley estate, vault of new SY, pinchin, Thames, whityechapel.

I think this spreading and displaying had special meaning to him. Like you say a if ef you to London? Marking his territory?Polluting/poisoning the city?
Something more is going on here.

[Herlock Sholmes]

On that specific point, he may have hoped that, given the nature of the location, the evidence stood a good chance of being built over. If so, whoever dumped the torso wouldn't be the last, and probably not the first, to have tried such a tactic.

Definately possible Gareth. We could come up with a few 'reasons.'

Holes that are due to be filled in.
A private 'taunt' at the police.
A bit of cockiness (if it was his workplace.)

It's the effort that was required to 'dump' there that intrigues me.

[Fisherman]

RockySullivan: Fish, I'm really starting to lose faith in your reading comprehension.

I am a journalist, who writes articles and corrects other peoples articles languagewise. Have some faith.

You said the Danish killer dismembered and weighed body parts down, one part got lose and led to the discovery of the rest. This is a great example of a failed attempted at dumping a body while preventing identification. And that is why the torsos were dismembered and dispersed, not because the killer wanted people to find them.

Yes. Exactly so. But you were claiming that I had said that the killer led the police to the parts, which is totally wrong. It may be a languagebased miscomprehension, but it´s wrong just the same. And that would be fine with me.

Are you serious Fish? And if you live in the middle of London where do you go with a shovel and bury a body?

Battersea gardens, for example, under the shrubbery. If he could go there and dump the parts, he could also have dug them down. Or in any other park or on a building site. Or in a cemetery. I am sure that there will have been places. If you check you will probably find examples of murderers in London who have employed this method.

You just gonna mosey around with a shovel and a torso til you find a good plot of land and dig for an hour?

It does occur, you know.

A sack with a stones? You describing your balls there? What you just gonna carry that sack with stones and a dead body down to the Thames and dump it in? Nobody will notice.

It does occur, you know.

A bonfire? In your backyard perhaps, you going to burn an entire body yea? What are you thinking?

That Robert Pickton did this exact thing, for example. It does occur, you know.

You are welcome to be sarcastic - and run the risk of having it flung back in your face - but you may wish to choose better opportunities. As it stands, you are giving yourself away rather badly.

The parts were packaged as a disguise while the killer carried the parts until they could be dumped, not as a gift for those who found them.

Maybe. But if he wanted to disguise what he did, why place a torso in the New scotland Yard? And why go through the trouble, only to them allow the carefully disguised packages to be discovered, nearly all of them?

[Fisherman]

On that specific point, he may have hoped that, given the nature of the location, the evidence stood a good chance of being built over. If so, whoever dumped the torso wouldn't be the last, and probably not the first, to have tried such a tactic.

Since when do people build sprightly new cellar vaults with the intention to build them over...?

[RockySullivan]

That Robert Pickton did this exact thing, for example. It does occur, you know.

You are welcome to be sarcastic - and run the risk of having it flung back in your face - but you may wish to choose better opportunities. As it stands, you are giving yourself away rather badly.

The parts were packaged as a disguise while the killer carried the parts until they could be dumped, not as a gift for those who found them.

Maybe. But if he wanted to disguise what he did, why place a torso in the New scotland Yard? And why go through the trouble, only to them allow the carefully disguised packages to be discovered, nearly all of them?

Sorry Fish but are you staying at the Marriot by any chance? Pickton lived on a farm.

[Abby Normal]

You didn't really address any of my points about why the killer might not have used weights. You just said it's easy and fairly basic, but you ignored all the reasons for why wasn't done.

The Whitehall torso was hidden anyway, possibly even planned to be buried. Pinchin torso was out on the street. Similar but different.

Hi rocky
No evidence of any of the parts in the Thames were tried to be weighted down. If you are trying to make something disappear in water you weight it down.

It’s murder 101 stuff and has been employed by killers for hundreds of years. Just because some are found that WERE weighted doesn’t mean it doesn’t work, or that then someone wouldn’t even try.

Also, alternatively, after the first few parts were found in the river and became publicly known, he would then know that just throwing them in the water would not make them sink or disappear and yet he continued to do it.

[Fisherman]

Sorry Fish but are you staying at the Marriot by any chance? Pickton lived on a farm.

Then I need you to explain why bodies can be gotten rid off in a farm bonfire but not in a London backyard ditto. And, speaking about language problems, it´s Marriott with two t:s.

[Harry D]

Bottom line is that two series of gruesome murders overlapping in both time and place is just impossible to ignore. We can spend all day scrutinising and overanalyzing the perceived behaviour of the perpetrator(s) it doesn't change the fact that this was either a freaky coincidence or there was indeed a connection between the two.