Did he have anatomical knowledge?

[RockySullivan]

I imagine that a pickle jar would be a staple in any butcher shop while a doctor would be more likely to have jars specific for medical specimens?

[Errata]

Interesting...so do you think Liz Jackson was not killed during an abortion and this could have been a misunderstanding by the coroner that a killer was dismembering /eviscerating women

There's really no reason for an abortionist to cut up a body. Most try herbal remedies first, abortifacients. And yes they can cause death, but it's the same kind of death as a miscarriage. So it's not suspicious. Those that pierce the embryonic sac or puncture the fetus have a much higher chance of being found out, since that leaves unnatural evidence. But I would think simply abandoning the body would suffice to not get caught. With no real forensics, there might be a hue and cry for a couple of weeks, but it dies down.

What I honestly think happened is that someone stole the baby. First of all, The math doesn't fit the fetus found. Liz Jackson's uterus was 10 inches long, which would put her at 26 weeks, but she was petite and malnourished. She was likely actually closer to 30 weeks, with an undersized fetus. The 20 week fetus in a jar did not come from an almost 30 week pregnant woman. And I doubt they screwed up on the development of the fetus, because one major difference between 20 weeks and 26 weeks is the development of eyes. If the baby had eyes, it was 26 weeks or older. Big visible marker to age a fetus. Doesn't even require an autopsy.

30 weeks is a viable fetus. Even back then it had a more than 50% shot at surviving. I think someone killed her and took her baby. I think they were likely crazy and desperate, and felt they could not wait for her to be closer to term. It's also possible that if she was very thin, she looked more pregnant than she was. I think the baby that Liz Jackson's baby replaced went down the river in a jar, where it had been since the mother expelled it. I also think that the Jackson's baby also likely didn't live to be a year old. Replacement children are usually murdered by the people that took them. Assuming it even lived more that a day past birth. But I think the baby was alive when removed from the body. The uterus was mostly intact and the cord was cut.

Crazy women cutting babies out of pregnant women seems like a new thing, but it isn't.

[RockySullivan]

Thanks for the informative post er. So you think a women had a miscarriage and dismembered liz for his baby. That's an interesting theory. Liz Jackson shares so many similarities with the torso killers victims though doesn't she? Could the torso killer have killed another pregnant woman within in days of liz? But then where is her body...so I see your point and it's a good one. Liz was said to be hanging around the banks of thames and possibly sleeping there I believe from what I read. I also read that fetus was found washed up and wrapped in a parcel on the day liz was found. Is this the pickle jar baby and was just error in the press? I will do some more research.

Deb A says that liz Jackson was seen talking to a man outside a pub shortly before her death. Pretty interesting. Pubs are key IMO http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=505&page=2

[Michael W Richards]

Burke and Hare though were operating sixty years before the Ripper and were paid for fresh corpses because surgeons needed bodies to teach anatomy. The medical profession was a great deal more regulated in the 1880's than it had been in the 1820's. I think the police did investigate people with a medical background, like the medical students who had gone insane, in their hunt for the Ripper, as well as dodgy doctors.

The key point here Rosella is when did they do that? After Annie Chapmans murder. Which greatly resembles Polly Nichols murder, so we are likely talking about a single killer of those 2..at least. Those 2 murders stand out among all the other Canonicals in terms of observed skill and knowledge.

Cheers

[Errata]

Thanks for the informative post er. So you think a women had a miscarriage and dismembered liz for his baby. That's an interesting theory. Liz Jackson shares so many similarities with the torso killers victims though doesn't she? Could the torso killer have killed another pregnant woman within in days of liz? But then where is her body...so I see your point and it's a good one. Liz was said to be hanging around the banks of thames and possibly sleeping there I believe from what I read. I also read that fetus was found washed up and wrapped in a parcel on the day liz was found. Is this the pickle jar baby and was just error in the press? I will do some more research.

Deb A says that liz Jackson was seen talking to a man outside a pub shortly before her death. Pretty interesting. Pubs are key IMO http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=505&page=2

I think that the removal of the fetus and the dismemberment are unconnected, though not necessarily unrelated. Theres a lot of ways this could have gone down. A woman could have cut out the baby and then her man went back to the scene to clean up. The Torso Killer could have cut out a viable infant and couldn't manage to kill it, so he set it aside and finished cutting up the mother and some one found the baby. Or the Torso killer took the baby back to his wife because she just lost one. I think the first theory is the most likely, but unless there were ridiculous conditions both in the pregnancy itself and in the resulting fetus, the fetus in a jar did not come from Liz Jackson. And it is not at all unheard of for mothers who miscarry to try and preserve the remains. It is usually a shocking loss, and at that level of the development the fetus looks like a baby as opposed to early miscarriages which just looks like a blood clot. But I think Liz Jackson's baby replaced the one in the jar. The timing is too coincidental to not be related. But I have no idea where the Torso Killer fits into it, if he does at all. Related events, but not necessarily the same event.

[Michael W Richards]

I think that the removal of the fetus and the dismemberment are unconnected, though not necessarily unrelated. Theres a lot of ways this could have gone down. A woman could have cut out the baby and then her man went back to the scene to clean up. The Torso Killer could have cut out a viable infant and couldn't manage to kill it, so he set it aside and finished cutting up the mother and some one found the baby. Or the Torso killer took the baby back to his wife because she just lost one. I think the first theory is the most likely, but unless there were ridiculous conditions both in the pregnancy itself and in the resulting fetus, the fetus in a jar did not come from Liz Jackson. And it is not at all unheard of for mothers who miscarry to try and preserve the remains. It is usually a shocking loss, and at that level of the development the fetus looks like a baby as opposed to early miscarriages which just looks like a blood clot. But I think Liz Jackson's baby replaced the one in the jar. The timing is too coincidental to not be related. But I have no idea where the Torso Killer fits into it, if he does at all. Related events, but not necessarily the same event.

It has long occurred to me that the Torso killer may well have taken his victims apart in some small dark room in the East End, and that with very little in his way to prevent it, Marys killer could have taken her arms, and legs, and head off. She was in such a state that it almost appears that she was being slowly, piece by piece, made into a Torso. Her head was almost severed already.

Wouldn't it make more sense if we have an indoor murder that seems to be leading to making the victim into large pieces, that a man who was at large at that time, doing just that occasionally, might be considered?

Cheers

[RockySullivan]

It has long occurred to me that the Torso killer may well have taken his victims apart in some small dark room in the East End, and that with very little in his way to prevent it, Marys killer could have taken her arms, and legs, and head off. She was in such a state that it almost appears that she was being slowly, piece by piece, made into a Torso. Her head was almost severed already.

Wouldn't it make more sense if we have an indoor murder that seems to be leading to making the victim into large pieces, that a man who was at large at that time, doing just that occasionally, might be considered?

Cheers

Maybe the torsos were not necessarily dismembered to prevent identification. If MK was killed by the torso killer, he had no reason to fully dismember and spread her body around. The dismemberments may have just been a way of getting dead bodies out of his apartment piece by piece. But if Torso was the Ripper, than the "curiosity" or "fetish" seem to play a big role.

[GUT]

It has long occurred to me that the Torso killer may well have taken his victims apart in some small dark room in the East End, and that with very little in his way to prevent it, Marys killer could have taken her arms, and legs, and head off. She was in such a state that it almost appears that she was being slowly, piece by piece, made into a Torso. Her head was almost severed already.

Wouldn't it make more sense if we have an indoor murder that seems to be leading to making the victim into large pieces, that a man who was at large at that time, doing just that occasionally, might be considered?

Cheers

G'day Michael

You're not suggesting that MJK was some sort of stepping stone are you?

[Abby Normal]

Maybe the torsos were not necessarily dismembered to prevent identification. If MK was killed by the torso killer, he had no reason to fully dismember and spread her body around. The dismemberments may have just been a way of getting dead bodies out of his apartment piece by piece. But if Torso was the Ripper, than the "curiosity" or "fetish" seem to play a big role.

Hi rocky
I have often said the same. perhaps, if the torso man and ripper were one and the same, then the dismemberment was done for ease of removal of the body from his place-either work or home.

Perhaps the ripper victims were done in the street at times he could not bring them to his private place, and the torsos, when he could.

I believe Debra has shown that all the torsos had evidence of abdominal mutilations (as did, of course the rippers).

[RockySullivan]

Hi rocky
I have often said the same. perhaps, if the torso man and ripper were one and the same, then the dismemberment was done for ease of removal of the body from his place-either work or home.

Perhaps the ripper victims were done in the street at times he could not bring them to his private place, and the torsos, when he could.

I believe Debra has shown that all the torsos had evidence of abdominal mutilations (as did, of course the rippers).

I think the uterus was removed from torso on Whitehall & Elizabeth Jackson. I'm really curious as to how torso dumped the parts? How did he carry the torsos wrapped up in old jackets or like a parcels. The way the parts were tied up and how may be a clue. But what I really want to know is how? How did the killer sneak into the Scotland Yard basement carrying a torso in an old jacket?

[MrBarnett]

I think the uterus was removed from torso on Whitehall & Elizabeth Jackson. I'm really curious as to how torso dumped the parts? How did he carry the torsos wrapped up in old jackets or like a parcels. The way the parts were tied up and how may be a clue. But what I really want to know is how? How did the killer sneak into the Scotland Yard basement carrying a torso in an old jacket?

And when? He wouldn't have had access to a Pickford 's van whenever he felt like it.

[RockySullivan]

And when? He wouldn't have had access to a Pickford 's van whenever he felt like it.

From whitehall inquest :
Charles William Brown: I reside at 5, Hampton-terrace, Hornsey, and am assistant foreman to Messrs. Grover, at the new police offices, Whitehall. The works are shut off from the surrounding streets by a hoarding about 7ft high.
[Coroner]How many entrances are there? - Three; two in Cannon-row and one on the Embankment. There are gates at the entrances as high as the hoardings.
[Coroner]How long have these vaults been completed? - Three months.
[Coroner]Who was admitted to the works besides workmen? - No one, unless they had business.
[Coroner]Was any one kept at the gates? - No.
[Coroner]So that any person who chose could walk in? - There was no one to prevent them. On Saturdays, all the gates are locked up, except a small-one in Cannon-row.
[Coroner]Is there a watchman there? - No.
[Coroner]Who are left on the premises at night? - No one. The small gate in Cannon-row is secured by a latch, and it is not everybody who can undo it.
[Coroner]Is there any watchman outside? - No.
[Coroner]What were the approaches to the vaults? - A road made of planks laid two abreast. Once down in the vaults it is very dark. The floors have to be laid there and the drains put down. Carpenters were at work there the week before the discovery.
[Coroner]Did you observe anything about the state of the locks on the following Monday morning? - No.
[Coroner]Did they look as if they had been forced? - I did not notice.
[Coroner]Do you think previous knowledge was required to get to the vaults? - Yes, I do. I first saw the parcel about half-past two o’clock on Tuesday afternoon. I had been in the vaults on the Monday, but had not noticed any smell. I was there in the dark. On Tuesday the first witness called my attention to the parcel. He struck a light, and I saw in the corner what looked like an old coat with a piece of ham inside. I procured a lamp, and the parcel was afterwards got out and opened.
By the Jury: Tools have been stolen on the works. I do not think it possible that any one could have lowered the parcel from Richmond-mews.

http://www.casebook.org/official_documents/inquests/inquest_whitehall.html

Testimony from the assistant foreman, he says he believes previous knowledge was required to gain access to the vault. Who would have had previous access? They say only someone who worked there or had business. It seems like possibly a small pool of people would fit the foremans criteria. Any theories?

[Abby Normal]

I think the uterus was removed from torso on Whitehall & Elizabeth Jackson. I'm really curious as to how torso dumped the parts? How did he carry the torsos wrapped up in old jackets or like a parcels. The way the parts were tied up and how may be a clue. But what I really want to know is how? How did the killer sneak into the Scotland Yard basement carrying a torso in an old jacket?

Hi Rocky
I agree-its perplexing!! I imagine he did it late at night and had access to a cart. And if his occupation required carrying around/delivering/transporting things then that would help obviously.

[RockySullivan]

Great point mr B. If torso did use a car or van would he be able to park it and safely enter the vault without being seen? Likewise if torso was a costermongers or some kind of cart salesman who pushed around a cart, could he hide the torso in his cart, then park and it and leave it unattended while he entered the vault?

[RockySullivan]

Hi Rocky
I agree-its perplexing!! I imagine he did it late at night and had access to a cart. And if his occupation required carrying around/delivering/transporting things then that would help obviously.

Hi Abby , what type of delivery men would be out delivering in the early morning hours?