Same motive = same killer

[Fisherman]

Hi Michael,

In the case of Elizabeth Jackson, we do know the answer to this. One flap included abdominal flesh and the external female parts and a part of the right buttock. If the killer had disarticulated/cut the spine first, there would have been more sectioned flaps.

Both strips covered two severed sections of her body and both flaps contained abdominal flesh and the external genitalia.

You beat me to it, Jerry. But do try and avoid the term "strips", will you?

[Fisherman]

Is that why he killed in Buck's Row?

Jesus, Harry!

[Abby Normal]

another similarity?

Tottenham torso:

victim had a large piece of flesh from a thigh removed

mary Kelly
her thigh had a large piece of flesh removed(seen in photo)

what to make of this?

[Fisherman]

Tottenham torso:

victim had a large piece of flesh from a thigh removed

mary Kelly
her thigh had a large piece of flesh removed(seen in photo)

what to make of this?

It is of course yet another similarity. But you can only cut away the flesh from a leg in so many ways, I guess...

[Sam Flynn]

Tottenham torso:

victim had a large piece of flesh from a thigh removed

mary Kelly
her thigh had a large piece of flesh removed(seen in photo)

what to make of this?

Kelly's thighs (plural) were de-fleshed from pelvis to knee, the right one to such an extent that the bone was exposed. Unless the Tottenham Ct Road torso was in a similar state, I can't see that it begins to compare - besides, if people are going to have their limbs cut off, then it's quite possible that collateral damage could come into play. No such excuse could be made in respect of Kelly, whose thighs were deliberately, and extensively, filleted.

[Fisherman]

Sam Flynn: Kelly's thighs (plural) were de-fleshed from pelvis to knee, the right one to such an extent that the bone was exposed. Unless the Tottenham Ct Road torso was in a similar state, I can't see that it begins to compare -

And that is where you are getting it wrong - of course it begins to compare! You are overstepping every line of logic that is put to you, Gareth!

... besides, if people are going to have their limbs cut off, then it's quite possible that collateral damage could come into play.

The man was a skilled disarticulator. Gareth. He was not going to cut away large lumps of flesh from a thigh by slipping. Once again, you are throwing logic overboard.

No such excuse could be made in respect of Kelly, whose thighs were deliberately, and extensively, filleted.

Really? Why was not THAT a slip of the knife if it was in Tottenham? Not that I think it was, but you seem to open up for it?

[Abby Normal]

Kelly's thighs (plural) were de-fleshed from pelvis to knee, the right one to such an extent that the bone was exposed. Unless the Tottenham Ct Road torso was in a similar state, I can't see that it begins to compare - besides, if people are going to have their limbs cut off, then it's quite possible that collateral damage could come into play. No such excuse could be made in respect of Kelly, whose thighs were deliberately, and extensively, filleted.

really Sam.

I can't see that it begins to compare -

what!!! or as you say-aaaaaaargh! your bending over backwards to find differences in obviously similar circumstances. how is a killer removing flesh from the thigh from there victim not even beginning to compare?!?!
of course it does.

[Fisherman]

really Sam.


what!!! or as you say-aaaaaaargh! your bending over backwards to find differences in obviously similar circumstances. how is a killer removing flesh from the thigh from there victim not even beginning to compare?!?!
of course it does.

Maybe we should ask: If THAT does not compare - what does?

Pointing out that things that look like each other just may be deceptive is kind of disingenuous. It´s not as if it takes away the similarity.

But I am at a loss to make Gareth see that.

[Harry D]

Jesus, Harry!

Tough crowd!

[Fisherman]

Tough crowd!

No punters biting...

[Sam Flynn]

your bending over backwards to find differences in obviously similar circumstances.

I'm not, Abby - I'm just trying to keep a cool head. There's nothing that I said in my previous post that's untrue or infeasible.

[Fisherman]

I'm not, Abby - I'm just trying to keep a cool head. There's nothing that I said in my previous post that's untrue or infeasible.

Untrue? No, of course not - there may always be an unexpected alternative explanation to any phenomenon.

But infeasible? Of course it is infeasible when you suggest that a common identity is not the logical solution to the riddle. Very infeasible, but nevertheless an outside (or freak) possibility - that is what your bid amounts to in my eyes.

We can say that it was quite probably the same man who committed both series AND keep a cool head, you know. It is not as if it would be an exhibition of unwarranted rash behavior to accept that as the overwhelming probability. It would instead be about time. It should be the point from which we work, and if anything surfaces to dissolve the notion, then fine - we change views again.

Let the facts rule, I say.

[Michael W Richards]

Tottenham torso:

victim had a large piece of flesh from a thigh removed

mary Kelly
her thigh had a large piece of flesh removed(seen in photo)

what to make of this?

As Sam pointed out already, Marys right thigh was completely "stripped" to the bone...sorry for use of that word again Fish, and her left inner thigh was also stripped of flesh. So to say Mary had a large piece of flesh removed from her thigh isn't accurate, her right thigh had all the flesh removed.

Over the years here Ive a had a few smiles when people try to fit square pegs into round holes by shaving off the sides a bit, meaning overlooking the inconsistencies within their own theory, anything to make their own theory seem more viable. Ive also smiled when people say that its clear Jack killed Liz Stride...but that's for another day and thread.

But this thread started off with a flawed premise anyway, so how could it not be a matter of overlooking the inconsistencies.

[Sam Flynn]

But infeasible? Of course it is infeasible when you suggest that a common identity is not the logical solution to the riddle.

Many women had their throats deeply cut during the period of the Whitechapel Murders, AND their deaths actually took place in the East End, but I don't attribute them all to JTR. "A large piece of flesh from the thighbone", which is about all the detail we have on the Tottenham Court Road finding, is not enough to instantly leap to a connection with MJK. When we consider the latter, and the fact that the flesh from both her thighs was completely removed, the TCR case doesn't begin to compare. Add to that the fact that Kelly's killer completely filleted both her thighs when under considerable time-pressure, whereas the TCR killer seems to have had plenty of time on his/their hands, then any comparison between the two cases is fanciful indeed.

[Abby Normal]

I'm not, Abby - I'm just trying to keep a cool head. There's nothing that I said in my previous post that's untrue or infeasible.

Hi Sam
Of course I know that. that's not my issue with you.

Its that you deny obvious similarities to the point of... well *insert insulting word here*. ; )

Its like you cant even bring your self to admit the word or to admit anything similar. and IMHO it hurts your credibility because your just so stubborn about it!

I lean toward the ripper and torsoman being the same man but I can admit to the obvious differences. Ive said before that IMHO the dismemberment is a check mark against them being the same man. but then I go on to give explanations why they might be different. Ive admitted that the body dumping method is obviously different. but then give explanations why they could be the same man and why they are different.

whenever anyone posits an obvious similarity--you just knee jerk=
NO similarity! and just go to smaller and smaller details. Like I said before, this type of reasoning then you should be discounting that all the torsos as similar and the C5 as similar too, for that matter.