Same motive = same killer

[Sam Flynn]

Did or did not they all prostitute themselves?

I might have mentioned earlier that we don't really know whether all the torso victims were prostitutes. Even if they were, it is - as I said - of little or no relevance because prostitutes are easy, and common, targets for murder and mischief.

[FrankO]

The MO’s of Torso man and the Ripper clearly differed in one regard. One led the murderer to do as he pleased in privacy and light; the other lead him to fulfill his dark desire out in the streets, where he could be quite sure that he wouldn’t be able to do all that he wished and worked under time pressure and in darkness. That’s a big difference, as it has great influence on being able to satisfy his very driving force.

I would say that what was done to the Ripper victims tells us what was driving the perpetrator of these murders. After all, he risked his very life doing what he did to them. His first and foremost interest lay under the skirts of his victims, as that’s the part that he attacked when he had little time. He cut the abdomen open and cut out the uterus. When he had more time, with Mary Jane Kelly, I have no doubt that we see a lot of the dark fantasy that drove him. He did not only open up her abdomen and cut out her uterus (and other organs), but also cut (off) those parts of the woman that might be considered attractive to a man, i.e. belly, thighs, breasts, arms, legs, face.

We see not much of this with at least the last 4 torso victims, who (timewise) were killed closest to the Ripper victims. Only 2 out of those 4 had their abdomen cut open, only 1 of these had her uterus cut out through the opened abdomen and none of them were cut beyond this and the cuts to dismember. This is at least odd, considering Torso man had at least about as much time with his victims as the Ripper spent with Kelly, and, very likely, more. What strikes me is that Jackson looks quite different from Kelly, even though she was killed after Kelly. She had no cut at all on breasts, legs, arms, no fleshy parts that were cut off her body.

So, as far as I’m concerned, an important question remains: why would a serial killer, with regards to his very driving force, want to settle for less? After all, less time would mean less time for whatever it was that drove him. I think this is a viable question, since I have never come across any serial killer case (not that I know them all, mind you) in which the perpetrator went from killing a string of women in privacy (at relative low risk) over a long period to killing a string of women out in the streets (at relative high risk) over the brief period, and in so doing having less time to live out the fantasy that drove him.

[Elamarna]

The motive was an urge to disassemble women and the killer was Charles Lechmere.

There is no proof (singularis, not proofs), but if you are going to ask for proof, we can all pack up and leave. You first, Harry.

To me, the shared identity is beyond reasonable doubt. That is what I have said and keep saying. It is not the same as having a court decision stating this.

So there is really nothing for you to gab on about. Not that such things will stop you, but...

And to others it is not beyond reasonable doubt, in fact it is a possabilty no more.

Btw in case it slipped you mind, and these things do with all of us there were two questions i ask which are still awaiting a reply.

The police force you quoted yesterday, what files did they see and what was the content of those files please.

When do you beleive the last murder by this hand took place?

Glad to see its lechmere, unless you can specifically link him directly to the TK, there is i venture to say little to link him to either series.


We are back to what i posted in October 2016.

You believe the same killer carried out both series.

You beleive Lechmere was JtR, therefore he is TK too.

However you have failed to show any evidence to link CL directly to the Torso's. Does any exist?

Therefore you have two not one issues to address:

1. Show a firm link between the two series of murders, one which is not reliant on generalisations of supposed similarities.

2. Direct conclusive EVIDENCE, that Lechmere can be linked to either Series.

At present with all due respect, there are possible, inconclusive and sometimes faulty links to the Nichols murder.
There is no evidence i can see to link him to Kelly for instance, other than what could be applied to many others, that is he lived locally and it may have been on his way to work or it may not have been.


Given you quote the similarities between Kelly and Jackson, such a real link would be very useful would it not?

Steve

[Herlock Sholmes]

. Each and every false similarity you perceive must be proven before it can be ruled out. So far, none of them has.

As you well know Fish these cannot be conclusively proven 130 years later unless ‘new’ evidence comes to light.

If you make a statement based on your interpretation of the evidence and no one can put forward a possible refutation or even a possible alternative explaination then you are within your rights to say that your interpretation is likeiest to be the correct one.

However, if you make statements and people (like Gareth, Steve and Trevor) put forward possible alternative explainations then you cant claim to be conclusively correct. Only that you believe that you have made the correct interpretation and that they have done the opposite.

At a distance of 130 years its very difficult and usually impossible to be certain of anything (except that certain events occurred.) For example, saying that the killer dismembered due to a paraphilia cannot be stated as a fact as he may well have done it purely for ease of disposal. We cannot know what was going on in the killers mind just as we werent there to see the bodies in situ.

It goes without saying that you are within your rights to interpret as your own intelligence and experience allows (its what we all do) but if i have a sinlge bugbear in ripperology (and ive mentioned this in other threads) it is over-confidence. At 130 years distance we should all be hyper-sensitive to this.

For whatever reason i, and others, feel that you are over-confident (of course you are fully at liberty to be.) If bias is suggested, or stated, it is because you refuse to admit of the possibilty of alternative explainations. Explainations that many of us feel to be very reasonable and possible. To suggest that those explainations have to be conclusively proven (again after 130 years) is, im afraid, unreasonable at minimum. Digressing slightly, you use ‘the Mizen Scam’ to explain events in Buck’s Row despite there being not a smidgeon of evidence for it occurring. Why is that ‘alternative’ explaination permissable but alternative explainations for various medical issues or a killers motives are not?

Its not a rigid adherance to facts Fish its a blind refusal to countenance alternatives. Alternatives that we have no way of knowing for certain are true or false. I am not biased. It does not bother me in the slightest if Tk and the ripper were one and the same or not. In actual fact, if they were one and the same it would give us more to go on in our efforts to unmask him. Unfortunately though i, and others, dont feel that they were. Bias doesnt enter into it for me. As for ignorance...im perfectly willing to hold up my hands and say that my knowledge of the TK murders is nowhere near your own (or Gareth’s or Steve’s) i just base my opinions on what i know and what ive read. That’s what we all do, hopefully.

[Fisherman]

I am say yet again that a definitive link between what you cite as similarities has not been established, you saying it has does not make it so Christer.

It may be for you, i accept that, you must accept others do not agree.


Steve

Actually, you must agree, Steve. The series ARE linked in the respects listed. Whether that link is a true or a false one is another matter, but linked they are.

[Fisherman]

I might have mentioned earlier that we don't really know whether all the torso victims were prostitutes. Even if they were, it is - as I said - of little or no relevance because prostitutes are easy, and common, targets for murder and mischief.

Since we only have one victims identity, we cannot know if the others were prostitutes too. But for the ones we know the ID of, the correlation is 100 %.

It is extremely relevant for the discussion, since it tells us that as far as we can tell, the victimology is the same in this respect.

[Elamarna]

Actually, you must agree, Steve. The series ARE linked in the respects listed. Whether that link is a true or a false one is another matter, but linked they are.

They are linked in that:

They occur in the same city.

The Torso's from 87-89 are in the sametime scale as the 88 series.

The bodies are female and a knife is used in both series.

Those are the hard definitive links.

The rest is interpretation by various researchers.


Steve

[Elamarna]

Since we only have one victims identity, we cannot know if the others were prostitutes too. But for the ones we know the ID of, the correlation is 100 %.

It is extremely relevant for the discussion, since it tells us that as far as we can tell, the victimology is the same in this respect.

Given the number of Torso's you include 1 is not statistically significant.


Steve

[Fisherman]

Frank?

What are you doing here? I thought this was the terrible three against me only?

Anyways, you are welcome to the shooting gallery!

I will post your thoughts with a few red observations where I think you are a bit premature or wrong.

The MO’s of Torso man and the Ripper clearly differed in one regard. One led the murderer to do as he pleased in privacy and light; the other lead him to fulfill his dark desire out in the streets, where he could be quite sure that he wouldn’t be able to do all that he wished and worked under time pressure and in darkness. That’s a big difference, as it has great influence on being able to satisfy his very driving force.
Here, you are presupposing that you know his driving force, Frank, and I am anything but sure that you do. You also predispose that he would have gone further with the Ripper victims given the time, but I don´t think that necessarily applies either.

I would say that what was done to the Ripper victims tells us what was driving the perpetrator of these murders. After all, he risked his very life doing what he did to them.
But what drove him? Can we know?
His first and foremost interest lay under the skirts of his victims, as that’s the part that he attacked when he had little time.
How would he know that he had little time? He would have time until somebody came along, and that could be ten seconds or ten minutes or half an hour.
He cut the abdomen open and cut out the uterus.
With Eddowes, he took the uterus and the kidney, and carved the face and cut the nosetip off. Since no reports were made about faeces in the facial wounds, it seems they preceded the abdominal carving. Why do you think that was? And why did he take a kidney too if a uterus was his desire?

When he had more time, with Mary Jane Kelly, I have no doubt that we see a lot of the dark fantasy that drove him. He did not only open up her abdomen and cut out her uterus (and other organs), but also cut (off) those parts of the woman that might be considered attractive to a man, i.e. belly, thighs, breasts, arms, legs, face.
So what was this desire? What did it stipulate? And why?
[I][I][I]
We see not much of this with at least the last 4 torso victims, who (timewise) were killed closest to the Ripper victims. Only 2 out of those 4 had their abdomen cut open, only 1 of these had her uterus cut out through the opened abdomen and none of them were cut beyond this and the cuts to dismember. This is at least odd, considering Torso man had at least about as much time with his victims as the Ripper spent with Kelly, and, very likely, more. What strikes me is that Jackson looks quite different from Kelly, even though she was killed after Kelly. She had no cut at all on breasts, legs, arms, no fleshy parts that were cut off her body.
I refer to the Ripper murders as Torso light murders. I think that the Ripper murders were slayings where he was not worried about being meticulous or exact because he knew that he would probably be pressed for time. So he set about things quickly and produced sloppier results. But the gist was the same - disassemble the woman into parts in one way or another. He strived, if I am correct, after a result that could only reach near perfection if he had time and seclusion enough to cut meticulously and exactly, the way he did when he took the face off the 1873 victim.

So, as far as I’m concerned, an important question remains: why would a serial killer, with regards to his very driving force, want to settle for less?
Not less - quicker. Kelly was more, not less, remember. And your thinking only works if you have made a correct identification of his driving force. I don´t think you have.
After all, less time would mean less time for whatever it was that drove him. I think this is a viable question, since I have never come across any serial killer case (not that I know them all, mind you) in which the perpetrator went from killing a string of women in privacy (at relative low risk) over a long period to killing a string of women out in the streets (at relative high risk) over the brief period, and in so doing having less time to live out the fantasy that drove him.

There are many examples of killers with a narcissistic thinking who have gotten more and more careless, taking larger and larger risks. Basically, that is what our man does when playing the Rippers role. I would have been more worried about how he goes back to the torso mode instead of developing an increasingly risky MO altogether.
But basically, what you are asking is "Can a killer really do it like that?", and the answer is "Yes, it is obvious since the siilarities give him away."
You say cases where a killer goes from security to risktaking are not to be expected. How expected is it to find two killer in the same town and time with so many baffling similarities, Frank? The cutting of the soft part of the neck and throat, the opening of the abdomen, the taking of the heart, the taking of the uterus, the taking away of the abdominal wall in flaps, the vanishing rings leaving wrench marks on the fingers, the commonality in how no obvious torture was applied , all of these things - how do you explain them? Coincidence?

[Fisherman]

Given the number of Torso's you include 1 is not statistically significant.


Steve

Not for the series, no, but statistical significance never enters the errand if the similarity/ies is specific and/or many enough.
If you had your way, no two cases could ever be connected since statistics demanded dictates that two cases are too few. Sorry, Steve, but it does not work that way.

[Fisherman]

They are linked in that:

They occur in the same city.

The Torso's from 87-89 are in the sametime scale as the 88 series.

The bodies are female and a knife is used in both series.

Those are the hard definitive links.

The rest is interpretation by various researchers.


Steve

So it is "interpretation" that Kelly, Chapman and Jackson are linked by a number of other things? The taking away of their uteri is not a fact, it is "interpretation"?

That´s not very impressive on your behalf, is it?

[Sam Flynn]

[That the victims were - allegedly - all prostitutes] is extremely relevant for the discussion, since it tells us that as far as we can tell, the victimology is the same in this respect.

Victimology means next to nothing when it comes to prostitute killings, Fish. Prostitutes are easy targets, picked on by ruffians and killers since time immemorial, and there were plenty of them in London. There were also many poor women who weren't prostitutes, others who were runaways, and a huge number of wives, girlfriends and mistresses all of whom could have fallen foul of the West London Torso Killer.

[Elamarna]

Not for the series, no, but statistical significance never enters the errand if the similarity/ies is specific and/or many enough.
If you had your way, no two cases could ever be connected since statistics demanded dictates that two cases are too few. Sorry, Steve, but it does not work that way.

Totally wrong, in which case i would be the the camp of several killers for The Whitechapel murders, i am not. I see certain links between Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes and in all probability Kelly. Stride i see as a highly possible along with Mackenzie.

I also see links to earlier attacks but unlikely to include Smith.
My friend you are incorrect in your assumptions.


Steve

[Fisherman]

The police force you quoted yesterday, what files did they see and what was the content of those files please.

1. Show a firm link between the two series of murders, one which is not reliant on generalisations of supposed similarities.

2. Direct conclusive EVIDENCE, that Lechmere can be linked to either Series.

Steve

Which quote is that?

1. you have had the links, and they are not supposed similarities. The one doing all the supposing is you. Like "strips", for example. I go with the facts, and the facts link Chapman, Kelly and Jackson and therefore the series.

2. Lechmere was at one of the murder scenes at the approxiamte time of the murder. That is a link to one series.

I am reasoning on sound and viable grounds that the series are linked, and I am reasoning on sound and viable grounds that Lechmere was the killer. I have never said that I have definite proof of either thing, but I think that the evidence points in this direction.

So this is the last time you ask me for proof. It is an exercise in timewasting - and we all knew that before you opened your mouth.

[Elamarna]

So it is "interpretation" that Kelly, Chapman and Jackson are linked by a number of other things? The taking away of their uteri is not a fact, it is "interpretation"?

That´s not very impressive on your behalf, is it?

Actually it is!
Its intreptation that the uteri removal of Jackson is for any other reason than removal of a unborn infant, it is interpretation that it is in anyway linked to or comparable to the removals from Chapman and Eddowes in either motive or procedure.


Steve