Same motive = same killer

[Fisherman]

You said earlier that "Eviscerations equal offensive dismemberment". Are you now saying that's not true?

I am saying that there can be exceptions, yes. Offensive dismemberment is about psychologically challenged people, who evicerate not for practical purposes but instead on account of deep psychiatric disorders.

Dennis Nilsen wanted to get rid of the victims he piled up in his lodgings. He chose to do so via the toilet, flushing the parts down. One may thus discern a purely practical reason for his taking out the viscera.

[Fisherman]

I don't know what you're referring to, Fish. Kindly be specific as to what this "clear link" is. If it were obvious, I'm sure I'd have spotted it.

I don´t think you would necessarily have done so, if I may be so bold. I will not tell what the link is, since I have ongoing research in the department.

[Sam Flynn]

I don´t think you would necessarily have done so, if I may be so bold. I will not tell what the link is, since I have ongoing research in the department.

If it's not obvious, then it can't be a "clear link" then, can it?

[Fisherman]

The Torso Murders* would have been a mere footnote in history if it weren't for the Whitechapel Murders. I wouldn't imagine that too many people, outside the narrow field of ripperology, have even heard about them.


* I say "Torso Murders" but, of course, there's the possibility that one or more of them could have been cases of manslaughter.

It´s that little word "if" again. No matter if "if" could be reasoned away, it remains that the torso killings ARE much in vogue and much read about, interesting many people.

Incidentally, that´s as it should be, since it is a truly remarkable series.

[Fisherman]

If it's not obvious, then it can't be a "clear link" then, can it?

A link can be obvious to some, and not to others. "Obvious" is not a universal thing.
A link can be VERY clear - and absolutely correct - to some, while it is not easy to spot for everybody.

To understand the link I am talking about, some knowledge in a field I am not going to name is necessary - or at least helpful. I´m sorry if I was unclear myself to some extent.

But let´s leave this subject, since it won´t be going anywhere as it stands.

[Fisherman]

Gareth, you still have not commented on whether you think it more likely with to killers who both cut away abdominal walls in flaps than just the one. Would you care to comment on that particular issue?

[Abby Normal]

hey jerry, so Lawson Tait says it's the same killer in 1889. Then what happened for the next century? It's so obvious the murders are related I'm flabbergasted that this hasn't been the general consensus since they occurred. How could people not put two and two together? But I am one of those people who thinks that everything everyone thinks about anything is backwards.

Hi Rocky
the same reason people are stuck on the c5 because of the MM. it got written in stone.

No one at the time even considered it (torsos and ripper being the same) and still don't because of that IMHO.

But thanks to stellar researchers like Debra Arif (and Fish) we can look at them in a new light.

[RockySullivan]

He probably tracked down L E Fisher, noted that this was not the victim, and left the underwear behind as a red herring. Clever guy.

Or he knew Elizabeth Jackson's name and it wasn't what was written

[Sam Flynn]

It´s that little word "if" again. No matter if "if" could be reasoned away, it remains that the torso killings ARE much in vogue and much read about, interesting many people.

Not many people, though. It's even a bit of a side-show among nerdy ripperologists like you and me.

Incidentally, that´s as it should be, since it is a truly remarkable series.

Is it? There's a long history of torsos being dumped, and they're only sometimes part of a series.

[Fisherman]

Or he knew Elizabeth Jackson's name and it wasn't what was written

Yes, but why undercomplicate on a thread like this?

[Sam Flynn]

Gareth, you still have not commented on whether you think it more likely with to killers who both cut away abdominal walls in flaps than just the one. Would you care to comment on that particular issue?

I have commented, Fish. I commented that there are only so many ways one can cut open an abdomen.

[Joshua Rogan]

Yes, and they are not any useful comparisons for that reason. Monetary gain was not the motive in either of the series we are looking at. Nor did Burke and Hare anticipate access to the body - they sold it on.

But I note the effort, so thanks!

How can you say what motive is, or isn't, involved? For all you or anyone knows the torso victims were killed by one or more unknowns who then paid (or coerced) a shady butcher to dismember them for easier disposal.

[RockySullivan]

Er...neither the pelvis nor it's contents were found, so how can that be a clincher?

Inquest: The liver and stomach, kidneys and spleen were normal. The uterus was absent.

My anatomy isn't good but the pelvis is separated and Bond makes a specific reference to the uterus being absent.

[Abby Normal]

They both removed the uteri and we know where it ended up in only one case correct? Jackson's which was removed and then disposed of. We have no idea what happen with the rest. They could have all been disposed or the rest eaten. The Ripper and the Torso Killer are the same because in my opinion they have the same signature. The motive is they like the act of cutting women's innards. Two madmen who are specifically focused on killing women and cutting their uterus out. That's one killer. Ripper might have killed them on the street, cut it out right there and brought it home to play with it, eat some of it and then disposed of it.

yes, yes, YES!!

The Ripper and the Torso Killer are the same because in my opinion they have the same signature. The motive is they like the act of cutting women's innards.

and again... YES!

[Abby Normal]

Decapitation/dismemberment are done to facilitate disposal and prevent identification. As Mary Kelly was murdered in her own lodgings, it wasn't necessary for the Torso Killer to do this.

yup...as ive said a thousand times, perhaps the torso victims were ones he had access to his place and the ripper victims were ones which he didn't and had to kill and cut up on the streets.