Practicality or madness?

[Joshua Rogan]

The treatment used on the Whitehall torso was Condy's Fluid.

Which, incidentally, was produced at a factory in Battersea.

[John G]

great post john. dr biggs also has the disadvantage of having trevor be the translator.

Thanks Abby!

[John G]

The abdoiminal walls were taken away from the bodies of Kelly (Ripper victim), Chapman (Ripper victim) and Jackson (Torso killer victim).

Colon sections went missing from the bodies of Catherine Eddoes (Ripper victim), Jackson (Torso killer victim) and the Rainham torso (Torso killer victim).

Let´sn ot get hanged up on semantics.

The rest is, once again, to a large degree lofty speculation on your behalf.

As you know we disagree on the significance of this. For example, in the case of Jackson two irregular strips were cut from the abdomen, whereas Kelly was pretty much hacked to pieces. Similarities can be highlighted, but so can many dismiliarities.

What I would concede is that the injuries inflicted on Jackson were very unusual and, as I've highlighted, evisceration is an extremely rare act which very few perpetrators are psychologically predisposed to carry out.

[Abby Normal]

hi john
" very few perpetrators psychologically predisposed to carry out. yes! eureka! winner! and perfectly worded.

This really sums it up for me. that there were two of these creatures doing this independently in the same area at the same time to the same type victims is almost to much for me. what were they even fighting over victims lol.

"excuse me ole chap, mind if i cut in?"
"not atall, after you, guvna"

[Fisherman]

As you know we disagree on the significance of this. For example, in the case of Jackson two irregular strips were cut from the abdomen, whereas Kelly was pretty much hacked to pieces. Similarities can be highlighted, but so can many dismiliarities.

John, we actually have Hebbert describing the flaps from Jacksons abdomen twice. On one occasion, he calls them "two long, irregular slips" (not strips) and on the other "two large flaps of skin" - and the latter description is EXACTLY the same as in the Kelly case. Moreover, we have no idea at all how the flaps from Kellys abdomen were shaped, and most certainly, they may have very much resembled the ones from Jackson. There is also the fact that the press described Jacksons flaps as representing the entire lower abdomen.
Therefore, there can be no dissimilarity proven about the shape of the flaps, not least for the very simple reason that we do not know what theyn looked like in the Kelly and Chapman cases! So can we please avoid claiming that there is information telling them apart? There is no such information at all, I´m afraid. Not a scintilla of it!

And, to be frank, what is more likely:

One killer, who cuts away the abdominal flesh in flaps, REGARDLESS of the shape he produces (and no, we do NOT know that the shapes differed inbetween Jackson, Kelly and Chapman)

or

Two killers, who both engage in cutting away the abdominal flesh in flaps from their respective victims?

If a killer cuts away pinkies from his victims hands, is it likelier that there are five killers if the pinkie parts cut away from five victims vary in length? Or is it likelier with just the one killer? What do you think, John?

What I would concede is that the injuries inflicted on Jackson were very unusual and, as I've highlighted, evisceration is an extremely rare act which very few perpetrators are psychologically predisposed to carry out.

That is very true - and it very much pulls the carpet from under the feet of any suggestion that two killers would be more likely than one.

[Fisherman]

hi john
" very few perpetrators psychologically predisposed to carry out. yes! eureka! winner! and perfectly worded.

This really sums it up for me. that there were two of these creatures doing this independently in the same area at the same time to the same type victims is almost to much for me. what were they even fighting over victims lol.

"excuse me ole chap, mind if i cut in?"
"not atall, after you, guvna"

To be continued:


"Then I´ll have the heart and the uterus, if you don´t mind?"

"No, I want them parts, you must settle for some other ones."

"Okay, then a section of the colon may perhaps..."

"Nope. Mine."

"Okay. How about I take the abdominal wall, then?"

"Sorry. Want that too."

"What the fu...? Why do you want the exact same parts that I want?"

"Yeah, I know it´s a bummer, but there you are."

"Alright then. I´ll just grab her rings, then."

"Too late. I already took them."

Two killers?

Yeah, right!

[Abby Normal]

To be continued:


"Then I´ll have the heart and the uterus, if you don´t mind?"

"No, I want them parts, you must settle for some other ones."

"Okay, then a section of the colon may perhaps..."

"Nope. Mine."

"Okay. How about I take the abdominal wall, then?"

"Sorry. Want that too."

"What the fu...? Why do you want the exact same parts that I want?"

"Yeah, I know it´s a bummer, but there you are."

"Alright then. I´ll just grab her rings, then."

"Too late. I already took them."

Two killers?

Yeah, right!

lol!!!

[Abby Normal]

compare and contrast between LISK and torsoman to see the difference between dismemberers -one whos main purpose is to dispose, hide body and identidy and one whos isnt.

discuss.

[jerryd]

compare and contrast between LISK and torsoman to see the difference between dismemberers -one whos main purpose is to dispose, hide body and identidy and one whos isnt.

discuss.

Good question, Abby. I'll have to put some thought into that one.

On another note, I was reading a thread from years ago discussing the torsos and AP Wolfe made a rather interesting statement to think about whether or not one believes in a single killer or more than one for both series. He said of the Ripper and torsoman, "So while Jack killed one victim, the Embankment killer made many kills from one victim. just look at the reports that flow in as the body parts are found, from all points of the metropolis the police and surgeons are busy, and so is the press."


I've been thinking about the cases in this point of view, lately. It gives a new perspective of looking at them.

[Abby Normal]

Good question, Abby. I'll have to put some thought into that one.

On another note, I was reading a thread from years ago discussing the torsos and AP Wolfe made a rather interesting statement to think about whether or not one believes in a single killer or more than one for both series. He said of the Ripper and torsoman, "So while Jack killed one victim, the Embankment killer made many kills from one victim. just look at the reports that flow in as the body parts are found, from all points of the metropolis the police and surgeons are busy, and so is the press."


I've been thinking about the cases in this point of view, lately. It gives a new perspective of looking at them.

yes interesting jerry!
perhaps the ripper did the same in a way. killing the victims close together in time. writing grafitti and letters (i lean toward dear boss, saucy jack and from hell as well as gsg as being authentic)
and sending a kidny to lusk to het the same effect.

[John G]

Good question, Abby. I'll have to put some thought into that one.

On another note, I was reading a thread from years ago discussing the torsos and AP Wolfe made a rather interesting statement to think about whether or not one believes in a single killer or more than one for both series. He said of the Ripper and torsoman, "So while Jack killed one victim, the Embankment killer made many kills from one victim. just look at the reports that flow in as the body parts are found, from all points of the metropolis the police and surgeons are busy, and so is the press."


I've been thinking about the cases in this point of view, lately. It gives a new perspective of looking at them.

This is a very interesting point, Jerry. With an offensive dismemberer, which I believe relates to the Torso perpetrator, dismemberment may be the primary purpose of the murder (Rutty, 2017). This creates problems for the single killer theory, as the C5 murders show mo inclination to dismember.

There are, of course, numerous other differences. Frank's map highlights just how small the area in which JtR was active actually was, i.e. in comparison to the much wider area where the Torso perpetrator, if indeed there was a single perpetrator, was active. I can't think of any rationale explanation as to why, if there was a single perpetrator, that the JtR-style murders would be confined to such a small area.

Nor are there any other examples of a perpetrator alternating between dismemberment, and JtR-type street slayings.

Victimology has been referred to. Unfortunately, only one Torso victim was identified. Im respect of JtR, I don't think he targeted a particular class of victim, but merely victims who were vulnerable, and therefore not in a position to put up much resistance, i.e. intoxicated, seriously ill, possibly asleep.

[Fisherman]

This is a very interesting point, Jerry. With an offensive dismemberer, dismemberment may be the primary purpose of the murder (Rutty, 2017). This creates problems for the single killer theory, as the C5 murders show mo inclination to dismember.

No, John, it poses no problem whatsoever since the Ripper murders were totally public, and a series where it can be argued that the victims were posed. The Ripper murders were, if anything, even more sure to be the talk of the town than the Torso murders. While some parts of the torso victims could have gone lost - and certianly some DID - there was never any chance of that happening in the Ripper series.

There are, of course, numerous other differences. Frank's map highlights just how small the area in which JtR was active actually was, i.e. in comparison to the much wider area where the Torso perpetrator, if indeed there was a single perpetrator, was active. I can't think of any rationale explanation as to why, if there was a single perpetrator, that the JtR-style murders would be confined to such a small area.

But the two areas do not portray the same thing - the Torso area displays the dumping grounds, whereas the Ripper area is the killing area. Did you not read what I posted on Joel Rifkin? HIS killing area was living room large, while his dumping area was vast.
If we are to compare, then, let´s compare comparable matters.

Nor are there any other examples of a perpetrator alternating between dismemberment, and JtR-type street slayings.

There are numerous cases where the killer sometimes dismembers and other times not, though. Of course, once we delve into detail, we will sooner or later be able to say that there are no exact replicas of a killers deeds - but that applies to ALL killers.

Victimology has been referred to. Unfortunately, only one Torso victim was identified. Im respect of JtR, I don't think he targeted a particular class of victim, but merely victims who were vulnerable, and therefore not in a position to put up much resistance, i.e. intoxicated, seriously ill, possibly asleep.

There is absolutely nothing hinting at the Ripper and the Torso killer preying on victims with different victimologies. Once we get a classification of a Torso victim, lo and behold: we have a prostitute!

Really, John - the two series have an encyclopedia of similarities. It´s time that was acknowledged.

[Fisherman]

Good question, Abby. I'll have to put some thought into that one.

On another note, I was reading a thread from years ago discussing the torsos and AP Wolfe made a rather interesting statement to think about whether or not one believes in a single killer or more than one for both series. He said of the Ripper and torsoman, "So while Jack killed one victim, the Embankment killer made many kills from one victim. just look at the reports that flow in as the body parts are found, from all points of the metropolis the police and surgeons are busy, and so is the press."


I've been thinking about the cases in this point of view, lately. It gives a new perspective of looking at them.

At any rate, a killer who makes the most of each strike like this is never likely to be a defensively minded killer.... An interesting point, as so many of Wolfes points!

[FrankO]

There are, of course, numerous other differences. Frank's map highlights just how small the area in which JtR was active actually was, i.e. in comparison to the much wider area where the Torso perpetrator, if indeed there was a single perpetrator, was active.

There are indeed other differences, John. The area in which the Ripper was active only contains clustered crime scenes: crime scenes at which most of the crime-related activity takes place, the encounter, attack, homicide and all the post-mortem mutilation. The area of Torso Man is much bigger because he separated the scene where he encountered, attacked, killed and did all of his post-mortem cutting and sawing. A clustered crime scene is indicative of an impulsive or disorganised killer, if you will; the one who separates these locations is “symptomatic” for an organised killer. Or at least, this is something that Vernon Geberth would tell you. He’s a retired NYPD Lt. Commander and has written a number of books on homicide investigations.

[Fisherman]

There are indeed other differences, John. The area in which the Ripper was active only contains clustered crime scenes: crime scenes at which most of the crime-related activity takes place, the encounter, attack, homicide and all the post-mortem mutilation. The area of Torso Man is much bigger because he separated the scene where he encountered, attacked, killed and did all of his post-mortem cutting and sawing. A clustered crime scene is indicative of an impulsive or disorganised killer, if you will; the one who separates these locations is “symptomatic” for an organised killer. Or at least, this is something that Vernon Geberth would tell you. He’s a retired NYPD Lt. Commander and has written a number of books on homicide investigations.

Not a single one of the differences is even remotely conclusive, and they must all give way to the very rare and unusual similarities. I´m afraid that remains.

Yes, in the Torso series the murder scenes and the dumping scenes were separated. But it is only if we make the assumption that the Ripper could not have dumped his bodies elsewhere if he had had the need that this becomes of interest. Once again - if the torso victims were killed in a spot that could be linked to the killer, then there was a need to remove the bodies from that spot. Once again, if the same killer chose to kill in the streets, then there would be no need to remove the bodies afterwards. It is a VERY easy equation that entirely allows us to see how a perceived difference in mindset may in fact be something totally different - a purely practical measure.
This is where so much goes wrong when people reason that there were two killers: they insert different mindsets into their thought-up killers, they divide them into categories that are not compatible with each other. But it is pure invention.

Yes, disorganized killers will often leave clustered crime scenes behind. IF, that is, they leave them at all. Many choose not to and are found with their victims. The fewest of them are silent killers. They are not as likely as organized killers to remove the murder weapon from the scene together with any other evidence that could be used to catch them.
Plus, we of course do NOT know that the Ripper struck where he found his prey, the way disorganized killers will normally do. Instead, it seems that he may have used a ruse, feigning to be a punter and following his victims to secluded places, chosen by them. Alternatively directing them to such places. And that is anything but disorganized behavior.

I´m sure that more differences can be listed.

I am equally sure that they will not in the slightest alter the list of similarities that points out, beyond reasonable doubt, that we are looking at a single killer. Until we can make that list of similarities go away, no inconclusive difference - or no amount of inconclusive differences - will have any real impact.