Same motive = same killer

[Abby Normal]

In no case where parts were recovered, perhaps. Maybe the parts not recovered were weighed down successfully? Or came loose at a later stage and floated out to sea unnoticed.



I suspect the wrapping was a practical measure for transport convenience, so that blood and the products of putrefaction wouldn't seep out all over the place, and also so that undue attention wouldn't be drawn to them if casually observed.
The bear paw that was initially thought to be an arm was also wrapped up. Does that mean they were intended to be discovered?

Perhaps once the parts were deposited, the dumper simply didn't care whether they were discovered or not.

So why go through all the trouble and risk of throwing some in the river, some in the Shelley estate (same victim no less!) haul one into the vaults one on the streets?

[Fisherman]

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.

There are no coincidences THAT freaky, Harry. The option was well and truly lost with the abdominal flaps. So you make a very fair point.

[Sam Flynn]

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 possible that the perpetrators thought that the body parts would float away downriver, as many of them indeed seem to have done. Out of sight, out of mind, out of immediate danger of suspicion - a reasonable strategy.

[Fisherman]

It's possible that the perpetrators thought that they'd float away downriver - out of sight, out of mind, out of immediate danger of suspicion. A reasonable strategy.

Not after 1873, when twelve out of thirteen parts floated down the river were found. Or are you reasoning that the killer thought "better luck next time"? After each failed effort?

[RockySullivan]

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?[/B]

Because he's living in a densely populated city. There are no places to dump a body where it wont be found. I doubt you can walk to the embankment and a dig a big hole. What if someone sees you? You can't have a bonfire and burn a body. Whitehall was a decent enough hiding spot that it sat there for a bit. None of the methods you mentioned of getting rid of a body are plausible. The killer knew of course the parts would be found, so he disguised the body parts so he could bring them outside and dispersed them to hinder/prevent/delay the identification.

[Sam Flynn]

So why go through all the trouble and risk of throwing some in the river, some in the Shelley estate

Scattered clues are harder to find, and harder to piece together. Literally, in the torso cases.

[Fisherman]

Iīm off for now. Some amazing stuff is being posted out here, I must say.

[RockySullivan]

Then I need you to explain why bodies can be gotten rid off in a farm bonfire but not in a London backyard ditto.

If you need this explained to you than you will be staying at the hotel indefinitely.

[RockySullivan]

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.

Hi Abby I don't see the killer dumping the parts with weights as plausible unless it's from a boat. And still, even if you use weights you can't dump them all together. You still have to disperse the parts, otherwise if one comes up they find the rest (as Fish kindly showed for us in his example). So he has to still disperse the parts. Why would he need to weigh them down, if they won't be identified? Which probably has a lot to do with them not finding the skull. He doesn't let them find the skull, and disperses the parts and there is no reason for weights.

[Joshua Rogan]

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

The floor hadn't been laid yet, but was still bare earth with some boarding to walk on in places. There was a trench dug in the vault for drains to be laid in, but this too had yet to happen. The foot and leg were found buried, but it is not entirely clear whether this was done deliberately, or accidentally covered by the earth removed from the trench, or both.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby I don't see the killer dumping the parts with weights as plausible unless it's from a boat. And still, even if you use weights you can't dump them all together. You still have to disperse the parts, otherwise if one comes up they find the rest (as Fish kindly showed for us in his example). So he has to still disperse the parts. Why would he need to weigh them down, if they won't be identified? Which probably has a lot to do with them not finding the skull. He doesn't let them find the skull, and disperses the parts and there is no reason for weights.

Hi rocky
Not sure what your point is. All I’m saying is that if he really wanted to try to make the parts disappear, some attempt to try and weight them down would probably have been attempted.

And RE the heads. I’m sure he probably kept those.

[Elamarna]

Some don't see this as relevant, I do.

Annie Chapman- murdered September 8th, 1888

Whitehall Torso- possibility murdered September 8th, 1888 (according to Dr. Neville)

Pinchin Torso- probably murdered September 8th, 1889

Hi Jerry

I would consider it very relevant if the dating of the last two was more conclusive.

Whitehall in particular is very debatable.

Of course Pierre thinks it's very important too..

Pinchi street could be a celebration of the anniversary of Chapman by the killer or by someone else or even an attempt to make it loom like such.
I would be more positive if it had been found on the 8th. Yes a murder was reported on the 8th, but nothi g showed up. Sounds more of an attempt to suggest a link than a real link.

I do recall our old friend Pierre suggesting a bolt hole near Charring Cross. Mid way between most of the Torso tonew and Whitechapel. Food for thought?


Not commenting much on this thread at moment because I see few facts to comment on.
It's mainly opinion.
Maybe when Christer completes the on going research he mentioned we will have something tangible to discuss.


Steve

[RockySullivan]

Hi rocky
Not sure what your point is. All I’m saying is that if he really wanted to try to make the parts disappear, some attempt to try and weight them down would probably have been attempted.

And RE the heads. I’m sure he probably kept those.

My point is it wasn't practical. No need to weigh them down and attempt to make the part disappear if he could quickly disperse them along the river and as long as the head wasn't found the body wasn't identified and if it was it wasn't tied back to him. We should look closest at Elizabeth Jackson's associates. If she was dismembered to prevent id the killer might have known her or be able to traced to her.

[Abby Normal]

Scattered clues are harder to find, and harder to piece together. Literally, in the torso cases.

perhaps harder to piece together but obviously not harder to find!

If he was trying to make it harder to find, he sure failed miserably!
and after much practice no less.

[Fisherman]

If you need this explained to you than you will be staying at the hotel indefinitely.

Itīnice of you to offer to help, and I gladly accept it - please explain to me why a London killer cannot burn victims on a bonfire to make them go away! Since I think we may need to get som practical examples into the discussion instead of just musing on our own, I suggest we take a look at Dennis Nilsen who - undetected - burnt six victims on a bonfire behind his London residence in 1980.

When we have digested this, it would be interesting if you could tell me why it would not have worked in 1887-89. Did the killer not have matches? Was the weather very wet?

Any information you can offer is much appreciated, but for now, I really havenīt got the time to discuss the errand further.

Then again, I donīt have to, do I?