Torsoman vs The Ripper

[rjpalmer]

none of the other torso victims were pregnant.

The Whitehall victim may have been. The uterus and pelvis were missing.

[Dickere]

Hi Sam,

Good to see you back!

I agree that the ripper would not have had the 'luxury' of murdering and mutilating where he lived, if he didn't live alone. Equally, he may or may not have had a place of his own if he simply preferred to leave his victims where he found them, to be quickly discovered. I can't see why a serial killer would have wanted the chore of transporting a body or body parts, if he could have avoided it by continuing to select victims at random out on the open streets, where no connection could be made with his home or place of work.

I certainly struggle with the idea that, if the ripper was living with his family [Lechmere, for example], he would have given himself the additional headache of including any woman among his victims who had to be dismembered and then dumped at a distance, either because he had foolishly killed her too close to 'home', or because of some personal connection between the two.

Love,

Caz
X

Bonus point for Lechmere. Clearly he was the Ripper on his walk to work and Torsoguy when he had the horse and cart during the day. He thought he'd got away with it too

[Abby Normal]

My theory, based on that, which is admittedly slim on evidence, is that Torsoman was an abortionist. The victims were botched operations, not deliberate murders. The mutilations were to hide identities and make transportation of the bodies easier.

none of the other torso victims were pregnant.

[jerryd]

sorry obviously meant to say Jerry!

Thanks Abby!

The conundrum for me, is the timings Dr. Hibbert and Bond give for the Whitehall victims death. Personally, I feel from all that we know, the Whitehall victim met her death on or about September 8th or 9th. But, that would contradict their findings to a degree. Dr. Neville, who examined the first body part at Pimlico (arm), was a qualified Police Divisional Surgeon just like Bond. He felt the arm had come from a body that would have been deceased about September 8th. On about September 16th, Dr. Hibbert examined the arm and came to a different conclusion from Dr. Neville.

I don't know if I'm making a big deal out of this or not, but, I think it's beyond coincidence that both Annie Chapman and the Pinchin torso were both murdered/determined to have died on that date. The Pinchin torso victim a year later, of course.

[Fiver]

I still can't shake my gut feeling that being 8 months pregnant was far more relevant to her sad ending than her current occupation, even if we are to believe that she was still walking the streets that far along towards childbirth.

My theory, based on that, which is admittedly slim on evidence, is that Torsoman was an abortionist. The victims were botched operations, not deliberate murders. The mutilations were to hide identities and make transportation of the bodies easier.

[Abby Normal]

thanks RJ
and well said. i was going to respond, but of course you are much more knowledgeable than me in these matters and did it better.

sorry obviously meant to say Jerry!

[Abby Normal]

HI Wulf

Also if you are saying the medical men belived they were by the same person, they also thought that person wasn't the ripper - from the essay by Debra:

the two murders were also linked by the press to the previous Rainham and Whitehall mysteries. Inspector Tunbridge, who had been in charge of the Jackson murder investigation, was brought in to view the Pinchin Street torso, along with detectives who had been involved in the other similar cases. It was reported that the general opinion of these detectives was that the mode of dismemberment in all these cases was strikingly similar and there was also an opinion expressed that these murders were of a 'different origin' to the Whitechapel atrocities.

Yes agree. very few people thought the torso and ripper cases were related at the time. But I beleive that JerryD and Fish did find some who did, but it might have only been by someone in the press, I cant remember.

[rjpalmer]

Hi R.J.

Elizabeth Jackson, who was identified, turned out to be a homeless prostitute.

Yes she was, Jerry, but might that not be a red-herring?

I still can't shake my gut feeling that being 8 months pregnant was far more relevant to her sad ending than her current occupation, even if we are to believe that she was still walking the streets that far along towards childbirth. I think it was Ed Stow who suggested pregnant women might be desirable objects for a certain twisted punter with a peculiar fetish, but he never explained how a 'prostitute' could stay 8 months pregnant indefinitely in order to fill that specialty niche!

Being murdered because you were pregnant is one of the great homicidal themes of the 19th Century.

To my way od thinking, the fact that Jackson was a prostitute and thus spent time in a workhouse and was known around Chelsea and Battersea Park, etc. is what allowed her to be identified in the first place, so it could be a type of confirmation bias.

We're all theorizing, but maybe the three 'unknowns' were an entirely different kettle of fish and that's why they were never traced--domestic servants from the continent, for instance, with no local family.

[Abby Normal]

Hi R.J.

Elizabeth Jackson, who was identified, turned out to be a homeless prostitute. I'm not saying the rest of the torsos were. We don't know, as you say. The victimology in the torso cases seemed to be younger women than most of the Ripper victims. I have always felt the Whitehall victim was more of the "theatre attending" type woman, with the dress improver and all. But, she could have been a "West End" higher class prostitute, too. Who knows?

I think the best comparison between the two series lies in Mary Kelly who was dissected in a very similar way to Elizabeth Jackson. And she was of the younger class out of all the Ripper victims. More in line with the age of the torso victims. Both had their abdominal skin removed in several flaps and the lower flap included regenerative parts and part of the right buttock in both cases. Jackson's head was removed about the sixth vertabrae and Mary Kelly had deep notches in the 5th and 6th vertebrae. Mary was a "disarticulation" away from removing both legs from her body. In the Jackson case, she had an incision from sternum to pubes and all the contents removed. Which poses a question, if E. Jackson's death and dismemberment was only to dispose of the body, why all the extra unnecessary cutting up?

thanks RJ
and well said. i was going to respond, but of course you are much more knowledgeable than me in these matters and did it better.

[jerryd]

Hi R.J.

Elizabeth Jackson, who was identified, turned out to be a homeless prostitute. I'm not saying the rest of the torsos were. We don't know, as you say. The victimology in the torso cases seemed to be younger women than most of the Ripper victims. I have always felt the Whitehall victim was more of the "theatre attending" type woman, with the dress improver and all. But, she could have been a "West End" higher class prostitute, too. Who knows?

I think the best comparison between the two series lies in Mary Kelly who was dissected in a very similar way to Elizabeth Jackson. And she was of the younger class out of all the Ripper victims. More in line with the age of the torso victims. Both had their abdominal skin removed in several flaps and the lower flap included regenerative parts and part of the right buttock in both cases. Jackson's head was removed about the sixth vertabrae and Mary Kelly had deep notches in the 5th and 6th vertebrae. Mary was a "disarticulation" away from removing both legs from her body. In the Jackson case, she had an incision from sternum to pubes and all the contents removed. Which poses a question, if E. Jackson's death and dismemberment was only to dispose of the body, why all the extra unnecessary cutting up?

[rjpalmer]

It's remarkable that Ripperologists can determine from a dismembered, decomposed, and unidentified corpse that the victim was a prostitute and thus the same "victimology."

Someone is having a leg-pull.

[Aethelwulf]

Using PI's 'catchphrase' - please see my replies below haha!

hey wulf
i think he was going out of his way to hide the Identity of the victims, but not hide the Body, parts. those were displayed, and placed in areas that probably had special meaning to the killer.

It's still very different though. C5 were laid out for all to see. No question over who they were.

i think Jerry D beleives the whitehall victim had been lured there, murdered and dismembered there, and provides evidence and a possible suspect.

Again, I think lying hidden in that location for 6-8 weeks is very different.

by chop shop, i meant somewhere he could lure his victims, kill them and dismember them. it could be where he lived, or not.

I was thinking of Lech's 'shed'. Can't see how that would work practially speaking.

the 87-89 torsos are undoubtedly by the same person, even the police and drs at the time agree to that. its if you want to include others, like the 70s cases, or tottenham. personally, im on the fence with the pre 87-89 cases, but think tottenham more than likely part of torsomans series.

To be honest I don't know much about the earlier cases but will have a look.

torsos/ dismemberment in victorian england was actually NOT common. thats a myth that has been overturned by the likes of researcher extraordinaire Debra Arif.

Maybe but restricting the timeframe and reduing the possible sample size is shifting goal posts a bit. Thinking generally over a much longer and more represnataive timeframe IMO shows that what the ripper did was very rare. Toroso man less so. Torsos being found isn't that uncommon relatively.

(who by the way was the first to bring attention to the similarities of the stomach flesh removed in flaps between the two series, and noted that all the torsos had postmortem mutilation beyond what was needed for dismemberment. it was these facts that first led me to lean toward one man.)

Also if you are saying the medical men belived they were by the same person, they also thought that person wasn't the ripper - from the essay by Debra:

the two murders were also linked by the press to the previous Rainham and Whitehall mysteries. Inspector Tunbridge, who had been in charge of the Jackson murder investigation, was brought in to view the Pinchin Street torso, along with detectives who had been involved in the other similar cases. It was reported that the general opinion of these detectives was that the mode of dismemberment in all these cases was strikingly similar and there was also an opinion expressed that these murders were of a 'different origin' to the Whitechapel atrocities.

Out of interest there was a chalk message at the Ordance Arms about the whitehall torso and a ripper letter too.

[Abby Normal]

It seems more like Torsoman (if all of the torsos were by one person) was going out of his way to hide the identiy of the victims, probably because they had some connection that may lead back to him. Perhaps that is why the Whitehall torso had been sitting somehwere for 6 to 8 weeks before being moved, so that it was well decomosed (if the head was found) to hinder an ID.

Also the idea of a chop that he may or may not have access to sounds a bit too much like special pleading. I think most likely is that he would have lured his victims back to his house and that was his base for his chopping. I can't see that he met and killed them elsewhere as that wpould introduce the complexity of transporting them back to his base.

They are just too different IMO and I'm not convinced one person did all the torsos. Torsos aren't that uncommon, usually for practical purposes of transporting and disposal.

hey wulf
i think he was going out of his way to hide the Identity of the victims, but not hide the Body, parts. those were displayed, and placed in areas that probably had special meaning to the killer.

i think Jerry D beleives the whitehall victim had been lured there, murdered and dismembered there, and provides evidence and a possible suspect.

by chop shop, i meant somewhere he could lure his victims, kill them and dismember them. it could be where he lived, or not.

the 87-89 torsos are undoubtedly by the same person, even the police and drs at the time agree to that. its if you want to include others, like the 70s cases, or tottenham. personally, im on the fence with the pre 87-89 cases, but think tottenham more than likely part of torsomans series.

torsos/ dismemberment in victorian england was actually NOT common. thats a myth that has been overturned by the likes of researcher extraordinaire Debra Arif. (who by the way was the first to bring attention to the similarities of the stomach flesh removed in flaps between the two series, and noted that all the torsos had postmortem mutilation beyond what was needed for dismemberment. it was these facts that first led me to lean toward one man.)

[Aethelwulf]

hi fiver
you make some good points. But I also, agree with everything Jerry posted, so wont repeat his in my responses.



* The torsoman obviously had a chop shop where he lured his victims to, killed and dismembered. the ripper victims could have been when torsoman didnt have access to his chop shop and had to kill on the street. it explains many of the differences. for example, removing or taking away heads, carrying a saw or needing to dismember to discard body, just isnt practical and or needed.

at tje end of the day, we have two unsolved post mortem mutilating serial killers operating in basically the same time and place, targeting the same type of victim, using a cutting instrument to dissect and remove body parts and the bodies/parts left publicly for shock value.

or we have one series,where the amazing coincidences are because its just one man, and in which the much fewer differences are explained by the killers different circumstances. i lean toward the latter.

It seems more like Torsoman (if all of the torsos were by one person) was going out of his way to hide the identiy of the victims, probably because they had some connection that may lead back to him. Perhaps that is why the Whitehall torso had been sitting somehwere for 6 to 8 weeks before being moved, so that it was well decomosed (if the head was found) to hinder an ID.

Also the idea of a chop that he may or may not have access to sounds a bit too much like special pleading. I think most likely is that he would have lured his victims back to his house and that was his base for his chopping. I can't see that he met and killed them elsewhere as that wpould introduce the complexity of transporting them back to his base.

They are just too different IMO and I'm not convinced one person did all the torsos. Torsos aren't that uncommon, usually for practical purposes of transporting and disposal.

[Abby Normal]

hi fiver
you make some good points. But I also, agree with everything Jerry posted, so wont repeat his in my responses.

* Not the same location. The Ripper left bodies in a very small area. The Torso Killer left bodies for miles up and down the Thames.Same location-same city, and within a few miles of each other and pinchin in the heart of ripper territory.
* We do not know most of the Torso Killers victims, so we don't know if it was the same victimology.Same victimology-women of a certain age and class. and we know jackson was an unfortunate so not a stretch that the others were also.
* Not the same time frame. The Ripper operated for a few months. The Torso Killer operated for years if not decades.IMHO the rippers victims span Millwood to mckenzie, so well over a year. at the very least, the two series overlap in time.
* Not the same type of mutilations. The Torso Killer's mutilations were functional to make it easier to transport the bodies.Incorrect. all the torso victims had post mortem mutilation above and beyond what was needed for dismemberment transport. and pinchin had a vertical gash to the midsection, like the ripper victims.
* The Ripper strangled, then cut the victim's throats. We do not know how the Torso Killer murdered his victims.this wasnt one of my points, but i basically agree with you here.
* The Torso Killer cut his victims in two across the midsection. The Ripper frequently cut his victims abdomens, but not in any particular direction and did not cut them in two.ripper used a vertical gash to midsection, as did pinchin. and jackson, chapman and kelly all had stomach flesh removed in flaps.
* Not the same 'disconnection'. The Ripper sliced up soft tissues. The Torso Killer separated the body into separate pieces by disarticulating it.they both cut soft tissue, and both cut away body parts. but i see your main point here. the ripper was mainly an evicerator and torsoman was mainly a dismemberer. i do agree with that no question. more on a possible reason for that later. *
* Not the same targeted areas. The Ripper hacked up the torso and face. The Torso killer separated the body at the joints and across the spine.tottenham had facial mutilations eerily and very similar to eddowes. also torsoman, mutilated the midsection and again all torso victims had mutilations not related to dismemberment.
* Definite missing organs for the Ripper. Possible missing organs for the Torso Killer, but they may just have been with parts that were not found.not a point i made, but i basically agree.
* Some possessions were taken from the sites by the Ripper, probably as trophies. Possessions were not brought to the sites by the Torso Killer - we have no idea if the killer kept them or discarded them. both ripper and torso victims had rings removed and taken.
* The Ripper posed is victims on their back, skirt hiked up, legs spread. The Torso Killer did not pose his victims. by posed /displayed I meant no overt attempt to destroy or hide body and or parts and left in places in such a way that had special meaning to killer one of which was shock value
* We have no idea if the Ripper or the Torso Killer used ruses.unless the victims went knowingly to their death, or both were blitz attacked where they were found(highly unlikely)then obviously the killer used a ruse to get the victims to a more secluded place.
* Series do not begin or end at the same time. I never said begin, but i did say end at the same time- pinchin and mckenzie. very odd coincidence, to me anyway.
* The Ripper killed his victims where the bodies were found. The Torso Killer did not - he transported parts of the bodies to multiple locations.again, not one of my points, and again, i basically agree with you here.

The only actual similarities are:
* Used a knife.
* Unsolved. well obviously we disagree strongly here.

* The torsoman obviously had a chop shop where he lured his victims to, killed and dismembered. the ripper victims could have been when torsoman didnt have access to his chop shop and had to kill on the street. it explains many of the differences. for example, removing or taking away heads, carrying a saw or needing to dismember to discard body, just isnt practical and or needed.

at tje end of the day, we have two unsolved post mortem mutilating serial killers operating in basically the same time and place, targeting the same type of victim, using a cutting instrument to dissect and remove body parts and the bodies/parts left publicly for shock value.

or we have one series,where the amazing coincidences are because its just one man, and in which the much fewer differences are explained by the killers different circumstances. i lean toward the latter.