Practicality or madness?

[Abby Normal]

When Stride was killed, Maria Louisa Lechmere, née Roulston, was living in Mary Ann Street, right between the two sites. When the Pinchin Street torso was cut up and subsequently dumped, she was living in Cable Street, some two or threehundred yards east of the railway arch.

In my confined world, such things are food for thought.

absolutely Fish
whats your take on the pinchin torso being carried and dumped manually? feasible?

[Fisherman]

absolutely Fish
whats your take on the pinchin torso being carried and dumped manually? feasible?

Quite so, I´d say. The fact that neither of the men sleeping in the adjacent vaults heard anything, coupled with the sack imprints on the torso very much allows for it.

[jerryd]

thanks Jerry-very close! whats your take on pinchin torso being carried and dumped manually? (no cart-carried while walking).

It's a definite possibility, Abby.

[John G]

Hi John
thanks for posting this-very helpful!

I think this helps show that the killer must have had access to a cart. and re Pinchin-wasn't there evidence that led the police to believe she was carried there manually? if so, perhaps his chop shop was very very near Pinchin?

question-how far is pinchin street from berner street wich I believe is the closest murder site of the ripper series to pinchin?

Hi Abby,

PIchin Street actually connects to Berner Street. Moreover, the Pinchin Street victim could well have been murdered on the anniversary of Annie Chapman's murder. It's very difficult to believe that these are just coincidences, particularly when you consider that the Torso could have been dumped anywhere in London.

The evidence therefore suggests to me that the offender was deliberately trying to draw attention ro the crime, which would be the very opposite of what a defensive dismemberer would wish to do.

I agree with you that the killer must have had access to sime sorr of transport. The alternative that he would have been wandering around the streets carrying a decomposing Torso, which is both risky and a bit ridiculous!

[Sam Flynn]

I agree with you that the killer must have had access to sime sorr of transport. The alternative that he would have been wandering around the streets carrying a decomposing Torso, which is both risky and a bit ridiculous!

Alternatively, and more likely IMHO, he lived comparatively close by and might even have had help in carrying the body to the railway arches.

[John G]

Alternatively, and more likely IMHO, he lived comparatively close by and might even have had help in carrying the body to the railway arches.

This, of course, is a possibility. However, if the JtR and Torso crimes are not linked we would have to consider the likelihood of two highly unusual perpetrators living within the same small geographical area, which statistically must be very unlikely.

Two dismemberers working together is also extremely unlikely. I will have to check Rutty but, from memory, I think there was only one dismemberment case where this was known to have occurred between 1985 and 2017: Lee Rigby.

As noted in my earlier posts, I don't believe the Pinchin Street perpetrator was a defensive dismemberer (82% of Uk cases 1985-2017 were purely defensive in character), i.e. on account of the unnecessary abdominal wound and the huge coincidence of the remains being found in Ripper territory, which strongly indicates to me that the perpetrator was trying to draw attention to the crime.

[Sam Flynn]

This, of course, is a possibility. However, if the JtR and Torso crimes are not linked we would have to consider the likelihood of two highly unusual perpetrators living within the same small geographical area, which statistically must be very unlikely.

Even then, London wasn't a small geographical area, and most of the torso dumps happened in the West of the City with only one in deepest Whitechapel. It's not inconceivable that two different people came up with a similar method of disposing of a body, amid the tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands (combined) who lived within easy reach of Battersea Bridge and St Georges East... especially considering that the torso cases were spread over a period of years.

[John G]

Even then, London wasn't a small geographical area, and most of the torso dumps happened in the West of the City with only one in deepest Whitechapel. It's not inconceivable that two different people came up with a similar method of disposing of a body, amid the tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands (combined) who lived within easy reach of Battersea Bridge and St Georges East... especially considering that the torso cases were spread over a period of years.

London is currently around 600 miles. However, as noted in my earlier post, we have various dump sites, in the 1887-89 cases, which are much more approximate than that, i.e. within a few miles of one another: Rainham seems an anomaly, but we don't know where the body parts entered the Thames-they could have travelled for my miles with the currents, and a thigh was found at Temple Pier, just 1.2 miles away from the next disposal site at Whitehall.

Moreover, you also have to consider the fact that the clear indications are that we are looking at rare forms of dismemberment, i.e. offensive dismemberment in each case. This is not only highlighted by the unusual injuries, but also unusual disposal sites in the last three cases (Whitehall being an extreme case, where the perpetrator went to extraordinary lengths to access the vault on the police buiding construction site; with Pinchin Street we have a body dumped right in the heart of Ripper territory, thus drawing attention to it; in the case of Jackson we have a body part thrown over the wall of Sir Percy Shelley's house, whose ancestor wrote Frankenstein, a bizarre thing to do when you consider the perpetrator could have easily disposed of the all body parts in a river or canal which is very common with defensive dismemberment).

Don't forget, a relatively high level of skill was apparent in all four cases, with all the victims dismembered by the unusual method of disarticulation through the joints.

Finally, although dimemberment crimes are much more common than JtR-style murders they're still pretty rare: just 88 UK cases over a 32 year period, the vast majority being purely defensive in character.

[Fisherman]

Even then, London wasn't a small geographical area, and most of the torso dumps happened in the West of the City with only one in deepest Whitechapel. It's not inconceivable that two different people came up with a similar method of disposing of a body, amid the tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands (combined) who lived within easy reach of Battersea Bridge and St Georges East... especially considering that the torso cases were spread over a period of years.

Hebbert was very adamant that the cutting was in every respect similar inbetween the four 87-89 victims. How likely is it that two different people came up with the same method of disposing of a body while also cutting these bodies up in the same masterfully neat way, Gareth? In the same town and time? Keep in mind that just about all dismemberments are sloppy matters, with crude cutting. Once you have navigated past that reef, how likely is it these two suggested people also cut their victims open from sternum to groin? Most dismemberers cut in six parts, leaving the abdomen intact.

You are suggesting something extremely unique, never before heard of. So how likely is it, really?

[Fisherman]

London is currently around 600 miles. However, as noted in my earlier post, we have various dump sites, in the 1887-89 cases, which are much more approximate than that, i.e. within a few miles of one another: Rainham seems an anomaly, but we don't know where the body parts entered the Thames-they could have travelled for my miles with the currents, and a thigh was found at Temple Pier, just 1.2 miles away from the next disposal site at Whitehall.

Moreover, you also have to consider the fact that the clear indications are that we are looking at rare forms of dismemberment, i.e. offensive dismemberment in each case. This is not only highlighted by the unusual injuries, but also unusual disposal sites in the last three cases (Whitehall being an extreme case, where the perpetrator went to extraordinary lengths to access the vault on the police buiding construction site; with Pinchin Street we have a body dumped right in the heart of Ripper territory, thus drawing attention to it; in the case of Jackson we have a body part thrown over the wall of Sir Percy Shelley's house, whose ancestor wrote Frankenstein, a bizarre thing to do when you consider the perpetrator could have easily disposed of the all body parts in a river or canal which is very common with defensive dismemberment).

Don't forget, a relatively high level of skill was apparent in all four cases, with all the victims dismembered by the unusual method of disarticulation through the joints.

Finally, although dimemberment crimes are much more common than JtR-style murders they're still pretty rare: just 88 UK cases over a 32 year period, the vast majority being purely defensive in character.

Exactly. And that answers the question about how likely two perpetrators are for the torso series: so totally unlikely as to ensure us that we may safely bank on the 87-89 torsos all being by the same hand. The term "not inconceivable" that Gareth uses reeks of desperation in my ears. Why would we turn to philosphy, when we have practical criminology and solid statistics to employ?

[Abby Normal]

London is currently around 600 miles. However, as noted in my earlier post, we have various dump sites, in the 1887-89 cases, which are much more approximate than that, i.e. within a few miles of one another: Rainham seems an anomaly, but we don't know where the body parts entered the Thames-they could have travelled for my miles with the currents, and a thigh was found at Temple Pier, just 1.2 miles away from the next disposal site at Whitehall.

Moreover, you also have to consider the fact that the clear indications are that we are looking at rare forms of dismemberment, i.e. offensive dismemberment in each case. This is not only highlighted by the unusual injuries, but also unusual disposal sites in the last three cases (Whitehall being an extreme case, where the perpetrator went to extraordinary lengths to access the vault on the police buiding construction site; with Pinchin Street we have a body dumped right in the heart of Ripper territory, thus drawing attention to it; in the case of Jackson we have a body part thrown over the wall of Sir Percy Shelley's house, whose ancestor wrote Frankenstein, a bizarre thing to do when you consider the perpetrator could have easily disposed of the all body parts in a river or canal which is very common with defensive dismemberment).

Don't forget, a relatively high level of skill was apparent in all four cases, with all the victims dismembered by the unusual method of disarticulation through the joints.

Finally, although dimemberment crimes are much more common than JtR-style murders they're still pretty rare: just 88 UK cases over a 32 year period, the vast majority being purely defensive in character.

good post John
And lets not forget the Tottenham torso of 1884, whos remains were deposited in the street in front of a heavily patrolled building and whose head was also found bearing strikingly similar damage as was done to eddowes-a clear and strong link to the ripper series IMHO.

[Fisherman]

good post John
And lets not forget the Tottenham torso of 1884, whos remains were deposited in the street in front of a heavily patrolled building and whose head was also found bearing strikingly similar damage as was done to eddowes-a clear and strong link to the ripper series IMHO.

That´s true - but I don´t think Gareth has anything against counting any of the other torsos into the total tally of the Torso killer, but for the Pinchin Street victim.

[jerryd]

Rainham seems an anomaly, but we don't know where the body parts entered the Thames-they could have travelled for my miles with the currents, and a thigh was found at Temple Pier, just 1.2 miles away from the next disposal site at Whitehall.

Hi John.

With the Rainham torso we also had parts dumped in Regents Canal and fished up near the Pancras Lock and Midland Dock Basin. The lock keeper at Pancras Lock felt the body parts may have been deposited in the canal near the Warwick Lock, Paddington and when the lock gates were opened they flowed down the canal to his area.

[Harry D]

Exactly. And that answers the question about how likely two perpetrators are for the torso series: so totally unlikely as to ensure us that we may safely bank on the 87-89 torsos all being by the same hand. The term "not inconceivable" that Gareth uses reeks of desperation in my ears. Why would we turn to philosphy, when we have practical criminology and solid statistics to employ?

Hello Fish,

Might be repeating myself here, and feel free to tell me to shuddap if I am, but if the two cases are linked by one perpetrator, don't you find it strange that we have one series spanning quite sparingly across sixteen years, while another was done in a twelve week spate? It could be there was a trigger in the killer's life that we'll never know about but I was wondering as to your thoughts on that?

[Fisherman]

Hello Fish,

Might be repeating myself here, and feel free to tell me to shuddap if I am, but if the two cases are linked by one perpetrator, don't you find it strange that we have one series spanning quite sparingly across sixteen years, while another was done in a twelve week spate? It could be there was a trigger in the killer's life that we'll never know about but I was wondering as to your thoughts on that?

Whichever way we look at these matters, there are inclusions that one would normally not expect, Harry. You speak of how one series played out over sixteen years whereas the other spanned ten weeks only.

Is that something that should be expected? No, it is not.

There are other matters that are also unexpected. Should we expect a killer to dismember some vicitms while not doing so with others? Is that the "normal" outcome"? No, it is not.

There can be no denying that we have to accept what we would normally not expect if we opt for one killer only for both series. But I really see no logical learooom NOT to do so. For me, it is exceedingly clear that there was only one killer, and it follows from there that the anomalies will have their explanations.

There are other parameters to weigh in, not least how we are dealing with murders with no identified killer. Therefore, we cannot know if there really WAS a hiatus between 1873 and 1884, for instance. Maybe there are other victims, unknown to us. All we can say with any real certainty is that there seems not to have been any more Ripper-style street murders than the ones we know of, because they would not have gone undetected.

I have listed the many similarities numerous times by now. They are so many and so specific that it would be senseless not to accept a link between the series. There is no other logically working solution; the odds that two killers would come up with that same set of inclusions independent of each other are astronomical.
The odds that we would have long periods of time with no torso murders are not very dramatic at all - many serialists have lay dormant for many years.
The odds that a serial killer would dismember some victims while not doing so with others are equally mundane - it happens every now and then.
And the odds for a killer adding a "sideline business" for some period of time? I cannot put a number on it, but there are killers who have stuck to a MO - but who have also killed in radically different ways alongside it.
Until we know WHY the Ripper series occurred alongside the Torso dittos for such a short period of time, we are left in the dark as to the underlying cause/s. And that is due to a lack of information. We do NOT, however, lack information about how both series involved extremely rare and odd matters, putting it beyond reasonable doubt that they were linked.

Once these sorts of things have their explanations, they normally sound very trivial, I can say that much. The one thing I have suggested on many occasions is that the killer may have developed a taste for having his deeds being trumpeted out to the masses, and that he eventually realized that mutilations in the open streets was going to get him the widest coverage, whereas the torso murders may have provided him personally a more fulfilling experience as such.
I am expecting a sexually driven psychopath and narcissist to be responsible. What we are looking at ticks all the boxes for such a thing.