Same motive = same killer

[Debra A]

Yes, and I see no new primary evidence other than researchers seemingly embellishing the facts to support the serial killer/murder theory.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Researchers generally dig up material that others then use to support a theory they have. No one was ever convicted of any of these crimes, Whitechapel Murders or torso cases, so claiming there was a Fenian plot, or each one was an individual murder or organs were removed at mortuaries, or a foreign sailor later convicted of murder whose motive was financial gain was in Whitechapel and did one or more is all just theory too, often twisting factual evidence but mainly playing on the lack of evidence caused by the age of the case. Who decides who can and cannot theorise if it is something boils down to just personal opinion?

Although I agree the 1889 news report is retrospective.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Funnily enough I just read this, from the Lancashire Evening Post, 16th Sept '89;

"It seems the remarkable story told of the visit paid by the man Leary to the London office of the New York Herald is not without parallel in connection with the revolting crimes which in the past 18 months have occurred in the metropolis. The Leary incident has recalled the fact that a few nights before the horrible discovery of the dead body of a murdered woman in one of the recesses of the basement of the new offices intended as the headquarters of the metropolitan police on the Victoria Embankment, a man answering the same description entered the office of the Morning Advertiser and stated that the remains of a woman were to be found in that spot. The man asked a fee for the information, but before this was paid a reporter was despatched to the buildings to ascertain, with the aid of the police, whether there was any foundation for the story. Search was made in vain as in Back Church-lane the other day, but a day or two afterwards the mutilated body of a female was discovered in the precise spot which had been indicated by the mysterious informant."

Hi Joshua/all

I’ve just been rearranging my ‘ripper collection,’ Pamphlets/facsimiles/graphics etc. It took me a while but I’ve done a bit of cataloguing too. Reading the article that you just quoted reminded me of an article in True Crime magazine of April 2002 called ‘The Shoeblack Connection.’ If it’s of interest to anyone I’m quite happy to dig it back out and give out any info. As far as I can recall it’s unaccredited.

[Joshua Rogan]

Hi Joshua/all

I’ve just been rearranging my ‘ripper collection,’ Pamphlets/facsimiles/graphics etc. It took me a while but I’ve done a bit of cataloguing too. Reading the article that you just quoted reminded me of an article in True Crime magazine of April 2002 called ‘The Shoeblack Connection.’ If it’s of interest to anyone I’m quite happy to dig it back out and give out any info. As far as I can recall it’s unaccredited.

Hey Herlock, I was thinking of starting a thread on that very subject!
There's three mentions of shoeblacks that I can think of; one was a witness to the Lambeth blind-school arm find, one was found asleep under the railway arches on Pinchin Street, and I think John Cleary was described as looking like a shoeblack. Whether there's any connection between them, or just coincidence, is anyone's gues. But any more info you've got would be very interesting to hear.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hey Herlock, I was thinking of starting a thread on that very subject!
There's three mentions of shoeblacks that I can think of; one was a witness to the Lambeth blind-school arm find, one was found asleep under the railway arches on Pinchin Street, and I think John Cleary was described as looking like a shoeblack. Whether there's any connection between them, or just coincidence, is anyone's gues. But any more info you've got would be very interesting to hear.

Hi Joshua,

John Cleary features heavily in the article as far as I can recall. Later today I’ll dig out the magazine

[Joshua Rogan]

Holy Moly Joshua!

Thanks for posting this. I had never heard that the same type of scenario happened in the Whitehall case. Very nice find there. It fits Arnold's MO but I wonder how much truth there is to it? I have never found an incident in the papers in 1888 that describes this. If true it really puts the spotlight on John Arnold and who his informant might be? I've often thought maybe there were bodies being cut up and dumped in order to collect reward money.

Hi Jerry, I thought you'd like that. I can't claim any credit for finding it, it was in the book of torso press cuttings recommended by Steve earlier. But it did leap out at me when I read it. Whether there's any truth to it is another matrer. I haven't found any corroboration yet either, and you'd think it would have been mentioned at the time if there was something to it.
As for cutting up bodies for money, who knows? It seems a bit extreme to me (although there are obviously historical precedents), but some people were certainly willing to make money from the murders; I believe a journalist was prosecuted for selling completely fictitious stories about the Rainham case.

[Harry D]

Probably late to the game but here's another case of someone approaching the press with tale of a murder shortly before one of the torsos was discovered.

Sheffield Evening Telegraph
11 October 1888
AN EXTRAORDINARY STORY
An extraordinary story is going the round of journalistic circles in connection with the mysterious discovery on the Thames Embankment. It will be remembered that the woman's remains were found on the Monday afternoon of last week. The previous evening, however, a man went to most of the daily newspaper offices, saw the respective subeditors[?] and inquired if they had heard of a woman's body being discovered on the Embankment. The man evidently expected remuneration, but, in accordance with practice, was required to call again after inquiries had been made. Reporters were despatched in hot haste to Westminster, and calls were made at all the police stations and other likely quarters, but without result, no discovery of the kind reported having been made. In less than twenty-four hours the remains of the unknown woman were found between the Embankment and Whitehall at the spot previously described. If this reported discovery was a hoax, and a strange coincidence, it is very singular indeed. Moreover, the man who called at the newspaper offices did not call a second time.

[Joshua Rogan]

Hi Joshua,

John Cleary features heavily in the article as far as I can recall. Later today I’ll dig out the magazine

Cheers H, I look forward to reading anyrhing you can find.

[Joshua Rogan]

Probably late to the game but here's another case of someone approaching the press with tale of a murder shortly before one of the torsos was discovered.

Sheffield Evening Telegraph
11 October 1888
AN EXTRAORDINARY STORY
An extraordinary story is going the round of journalistic circles in connection with the mysterious discovery on the Thames Embankment. It will be remembered that the woman's remains were found on the Monday afternoon of last week. The previous evening, however, a man went to most of the daily newspaper offices, saw the respective subeditors[?] and inquired if they had heard of a woman's body being discovered on the Embankment. The man evidently expected remuneration, but, in accordance with practice, was required to call again after inquiries had been made. Reporters were despatched in hot haste to Westminster, and calls were made at all the police stations and other likely quarters, but without result, no discovery of the kind reported having been made. In less than twenty-four hours the remains of the unknown woman were found between the Embankment and Whitehall at the spot previously described. If this reported discovery was a hoax, and a strange coincidence, it is very singular indeed. Moreover, the man who called at the newspaper offices did not call a second time.

Cracking stuff Harry, that sounds exactly like the contemporary story which the one I posted was referring to. Looks like corroboration that the story wasn't just some hazy recollection like Fairy Fay, in the north of England anyway.

[Elamarna]

Hi Jerry, I thought you'd like that. I can't claim any credit for finding it, it was in the book of torso press cuttings recommended by Steve earlier. But it did leap out at me when I read it. Whether there's any truth to it is another matrer. I haven't found any corroboration yet either, and you'd think it would have been mentioned at the time if there was something to it.
As for cutting up bodies for money, who knows? It seems a bit extreme to me (although there are obviously historical precedents), but some people were certainly willing to make money from the murders; I believe a journalist was prosecuted for selling completely fictitious stories about the Rainham case.

Well done Josh, I had certainly missed it, nothing else in the book i can see related to it.
its probably a garbled report, but i am sure if another ref does exist someone will find it.


steve

[Abby Normal]

Probably late to the game but here's another case of someone approaching the press with tale of a murder shortly before one of the torsos was discovered.

Sheffield Evening Telegraph
11 October 1888
AN EXTRAORDINARY STORY
An extraordinary story is going the round of journalistic circles in connection with the mysterious discovery on the Thames Embankment. It will be remembered that the woman's remains were found on the Monday afternoon of last week. The previous evening, however, a man went to most of the daily newspaper offices, saw the respective subeditors[?] and inquired if they had heard of a woman's body being discovered on the Embankment. The man evidently expected remuneration, but, in accordance with practice, was required to call again after inquiries had been made. Reporters were despatched in hot haste to Westminster, and calls were made at all the police stations and other likely quarters, but without result, no discovery of the kind reported having been made. In less than twenty-four hours the remains of the unknown woman were found between the Embankment and Whitehall at the spot previously described. If this reported discovery was a hoax, and a strange coincidence, it is very singular indeed. Moreover, the man who called at the newspaper offices did not call a second time.

HI Harry
These reports are so odd. and now heres a third. I'm beginning to think that these aren't totally false stories.

Its such a rare story-someone going to reporters and telling them about torsos that havent been dumped yet, but then end up dumped there?!?

whats going on here? anyone have a clue?

its either the killer with some odd habit of "declaring/revealing" the dump sites beforehand or..or whats the alternative???

[Elamarna]

HI Harry
These reports are so odd. and now heres a third. I'm beginning to think that these aren't totally false stories.

Its such a rare story-someone going to reporters and telling them about torsos that havent been dumped yet, but then end up dumped there?!?

whats going on here? anyone have a clue?

its either the killer with some odd habit of "declaring/revealing" the dump sites beforehand or..or whats the alternative???

The obvious alternative is money for a story, and if the papers actually bite, maybe an exclusive.

3 stories now, this one not long after the event.

To me it points away from the "same hand" idea.


Steve

[Abby Normal]

The obvious alternative is money for a story, and if the papers actually bite, maybe an exclusive.

3 stories now, this one not long after the event.

To me it points away from the "same hand" idea.


Steve

Hi El

But the mens story predicted something that actually happened?!? three of them? whats the chances of that happening.

in my mind its either got to be the real killer or the reporters/papers are making it up, no?

[Elamarna]

Hi El

But the mens story predicted something that actually happened?!? three of them? whats the chances of that happening.

in my mind its either got to be the real killer or the reporters/papers are making it up, no?

Abby,

i think you misunderstand me, i beleive if true, it points to someone connected to the Torso's but it also to me points away from the Torso disposer (for Trev) being the same hand as the Ripper.

If true this shows a want or need to tell the press of a body, for reward one assumes.


One can argue that if you are giving information in advance, shock is not the aim, which is much of the argument given here by some.


steve

[Abby Normal]

Abby,

i think you misunderstand me, i beleive if true, it points to someone connected to the Torso's but it also to me points away from the Torso disposer (for Trev) being the same hand as the Ripper.

If true this shows a want or need to tell the press of a body, for reward one assumes.


One can argue that if you are giving information in advance, shock is not the aim, which is much of the argument given here by some.


steve

thanks for clarifying El.

If true this shows a want or need to tell the press of a body, for reward one assumes.

but no body is there yet so how is he going to get reward? that makes no sense.

One can argue that if you are giving information in advance, shock is not the aim, which is much of the argument given here by some.

maybe not shock per se, but the thrill of doing it? the urge to "tell" about it?

[Harry D]

Plausible deniability, perhaps?