Same motive = same killer

[Debra A]

If he'd read Hebbert's words on the torsos, the following line may have led to his misunderstanding;

"The joints in each case, with the exception of the left knee, were exactly opened, and the limbs neatly disarticulated."

In isolation, this could be read as saying that the left knee was not opened, but the context and the rest of the article makes clear it was opened, but evidently less neatly.

No idea about the hands though.

Which is exactly what he seems to have done with the Times typo about a Whitehall vault arm and the girl with the rose tattoo!
I also noticed his understanding of the Mylett case is a bit squiffy. He contradicts himself over Bond's stance in the book.

[Debra A]

That book needs a death skull marking. I remember that only a few weeks back, John G said that it was a really good book, and I told him it wasn´t.
And here I am, having relied upon it myself. More fool me.

Anyways, Gareths argument that the arms still being attached to the torso in the Pinchin Street case would somehow tell it apart from the other torsos is not very viable. In the end, much as there are very great likenesses inbetween Jackson and the Rainham torso, there are variations inbetween them all.

It's a sloppily researched (as far as the details of the murders go) but very well written book. And apparently people are willing to overlook his mistakes because he's also a very nice man.
It's only anoraks who are interested in the minutiae of the cases anyway, the general public seem to prefer an exciting story.

I can see where Gareth is coming from but Hebbert looked for the similarities rather than the differences and he found it with the neat disarticulation and use of a knife and fine toothed saw. Living at the time, he was also well aware that many people would have knife skills, but he still attributes it to the work of a hunter, slaughterer or butcher.

[Sam Flynn]

Living at the time, he was also well aware that many people would have knife skills, but he still attributes it to the work of a hunter, slaughterer or butcher.

Indeed, and there were butchers and slaughterers who lived and/or worked in most parts of London.

[Sam Flynn]

Gareths argument that the arms still being attached to the torso in the Pinchin Street case would somehow tell it apart from the other torsos is not very viable.

If there had been only one killer responsible for all the torso murders then, by the time of the Pinchin Street case, he'd had plenty of practice in the most efficient methods of dissecting and disposing of bodies. In all the other cases, the arms were removed and were arguably removed for good reasons. Yet this didn't happen in this particular case. Furthermore, what was found underneath the arches was already putrid, when - surely - an experienced disposer of bodies would have got rid of it sooner.

Perhaps he'd suffered a momentary lapse of memory or technique, or maybe his fridge had broken down

[Abby Normal]

If there had been only one killer responsible for all the torso murders then, by the time of the Pinchin Street case, he'd had plenty of practice in the most efficient methods of dissecting and disposing of bodies. In all the other cases, the arms were removed and were arguably removed for good reasons. Yet this didn't happen in this particular case. Furthermore, what was found underneath the arches was already putrid, when - surely - an experienced disposer of bodies would have got rid of it sooner.

Perhaps he'd suffered a momentary lapse of memory or technique, or maybe his fridge had broken down

hold on there Nellie!!! re fridge (ice house or maybe preservatives)??

you may have hit on there something!

[Sam Flynn]

hold on there Nellie!!! re fridge (ice house or maybe preservatives)?? you may have hit on there something!

If I have, Abby, his ice-house in the East End had evidently gone kaput a few days before the Pinchin Street torso was dumped.

[Debra A]

Indeed, and there were butchers and slaughterers who lived and/or worked in most parts of London.

Of course there was. But what is the probability that four different butchers or slaughterers all murdered, mutilated and dismembered women of a type who were unmissed and unclaimed, between the age of 18-40, parcelled portions of their bodies up in brown paper tied up with window or blind cord and dumped their remains in and around the Thames within a couple of years of each other? It's not like some would have us believe, that mutilated bodies were being found in the Thames on a regular basis. They weren't at all.

[Fisherman]

If there had been only one killer responsible for all the torso murders then, by the time of the Pinchin Street case, he'd had plenty of practice in the most efficient methods of dissecting and disposing of bodies. In all the other cases, the arms were removed and were arguably removed for good reasons. Yet this didn't happen in this particular case. Furthermore, what was found underneath the arches was already putrid, when - surely - an experienced disposer of bodies would have got rid of it sooner.

Perhaps he'd suffered a momentary lapse of memory or technique, or maybe his fridge had broken down

Gareth, the legs were taken off quite neatly and skilfully (and totally reminiscent of how the limbs were removed in the other torso cases) so if he suffered a lapse of memory or technique, it would have been after having done that.

How quick would you have him dispose of the body to earn the title "experienced"? And, more pertinently, why do you think that the killer WANTED to dispose of the body as quickly as possible? Has it never occurred to you that the killer may have killed to procure bodies? If that was the case, why would he suddenly do all he could to get rid of them as quickly as possible?

You make some rather strange points, you know.

[Fisherman]

Of course there was. But what is the probability that four different butchers or slaughterers all murdered, mutilated and dismembered women of a type who were unmissed and unclaimed, between the age of 18-40, parcelled portions of their bodies up in brown paper tied up with window or blind cord and dumped their remains in and around the Thames within a couple of years of each other? It's not like some would have us believe, that mutilated bodies were being found in the Thames on a regular basis. They weren't at all.

The Great Butcher Craze of Late Victorian London...? Combined with the Great Harrods Sale of Brown Paper and Blind Cord? For surely, that paper must have been bought in the western parts of town?

[Sam Flynn]

Of course there was. But what is the probability that four different butchers or slaughterers all murdered, mutilated and dismembered women...

I agree, Debs, but it's not impossible. Not that I'm precious about the idea of four perpetrators, but the geographical aspects alone support the notion that at least two separate killers were at work - one in the West, responsible for three of the crimes, and the other in the East, responsible only for the Pinchin Street torso.

[Sam Flynn]

The Great Butcher Craze of Late Victorian London...?

I'm not saying they all had to be professional butchers or slaughtermen, either. My grandparents weren't butchers but they kept pigs, which they'd kill and joint themselves; and they weren't the only ones of their generation who did that.

[Debra A]

I'm not saying they all had to be professional butchers or slaughtermen, either. My grandparents weren't butchers but they kept pigs, which they'd kill and joint themselves; and they weren't the only ones of their generation who did that.

But a professional butcher might say they'd made a right pig's ear of the disarticulation.

[Sam Flynn]

But a professional butcher might say they'd made a right pig's ear of the disarticulation.

Indeed, Debs, a professional butcher would be well-placed to make such a call, but a doctor or policeman might not appreciate the finer points of butchery. Perhaps they should have brought some butchers/slaughtermen into the inquests as expert witnesses - seriously. Since we're ostensibly dealing with butchery in the torso cases, I think a butcher's evaluation of the nature of the wounds might have been illuminating.

[Abby Normal]

Of course there was. But what is the probability that four different butchers or slaughterers all murdered, mutilated and dismembered women of a type who were unmissed and unclaimed, between the age of 18-40, parcelled portions of their bodies up in brown paper tied up with window or blind cord and dumped their remains in and around the Thames within a couple of years of each other? It's not like some would have us believe, that mutilated bodies were being found in the Thames on a regular basis. They weren't at all.

Exactly debs.
I think it’s a misconception among many on here that body parts were being found in the river all the time. And not only that but that murder was commonplace. Neither was the case.

You hit on another great point that I’ve mentioned numerous times RE victomology. Why weren’t most of the torsos IDed? Because more than likely they were unfortunates who no one cared about.

I think we can pretty much dismiss the notion that there was more than one torsoman!

[Abby Normal]

Indeed, Debs, a professional butcher would be well-placed to make such a call, but a doctor or policeman might not appreciate the finer points of butchery. Perhaps they should have brought some butchers/slaughtermen into the inquests as expert witnesses - seriously. Since we're ostensibly dealing with butchery in the torso cases, I think a butcher's evaluation of the nature of the wounds might have been illuminating.

Sam You know I like Ye! I respect you more than most on here. But you need to concede at least a little bit.

Cmon you can do it! : )