Torsoman vs The Ripper

[FrankO]

Great, this double posting...

[Abby Normal]

Debra
You can keep propping up your personal opinions on this till the cows come home but it it is not going to change the facts surrounding these toros, and no matter what those doctors opined back then there is no evidence to show causes of death, so no one can categorically state that they were all murdered not then not now.

I can't conclusively prove my theory no more than you can prove yours I am simply offering an alternative to murder based on my research and the evidence of a modern-day forensic pathologist whose input should not be dismissed outright

A more appropriate terminology to be used is " found dead in suspicious circumstances" which I think covers all the scenarios. Like many things in Ripperolgy, researchers have created mysteries when there are none to be created.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Debra isnt propping up personal opinions trevor, shes just stating facts, unlike you...whos just always spouting your cockamamy theories.

and show some ******* respect to her in your responses, among other reasons, shes done more research and found real pertinant new info on this subject than anyone. you dont even deserve her responses.

[Debra A]

Debra
You can keep propping up your personal opinions on this till the cows come home but it it is not going to change the facts surrounding these toros, and no matter what those doctors opined back then there is no evidence to show causes of death, so no one can categorically state that they were all murdered not then not now.

I can't conclusively prove my theory no more than you can prove yours I am simply offering an alternative to murder based on my research and the evidence of a modern-day forensic pathologist whose input should not be dismissed outright

A more appropriate terminology to be used is " found dead in suspicious circumstances" which I think covers all the scenarios. Like many things in Ripperolgy, researchers have created mysteries when there are none to be created.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Trevor, I have provided zero personal opinion in the post you quote.

I mentioned that James Monro, said that the 'he' thought the four cases were murders done by the same hand. He was there, he had input from and communicated with the detectives and police officers who investigated the cases and the doctors at the autopsies who made first hand observations. It's worth mentioning for people who haven't read much on the cases but have an interest, just so they get a balanced view of what contemporary thoughts were.


What is my theory Trevor? I don't even know myself.
But we are all well aware of yours..

[Debra A]

Debra isnt propping up personal opinions trevor, shes just stating facts, unlike you...whos just always spouting your cockamamy theories.

and show some ******* respect to her in your responses, among other reasons, shes done more research and found real pertinant new info on this subject than anyone. you dont even deserve her responses.

Thanks Abby. As long as others see it then it doesn't bother me
I'll always be the mouthy subordinate in Trevor's eyes.

[Debra A]

I don't know if anybody ever asked you this or what your reply was (I can imagine they did and if so, apologies), but how would you explain that only some but not all body parts and organs were sold (but, instead, were left to be discovered)?

Wouldn't that have been 'money thrown away' for the party not selling them?

Excellent question FrankO
I imagine that any seller of illegally removed organs from a woman who'd died during a botched abortion would want to maximise their profits given the double risk they were taking dismembering the corpse and dumping it in the Thames etc. , plus why not just illegally sell the body as a whole and minimise the risk of being caught dumping the remains?

[Robert St Devil]

4. And more importantly no evidence to show the causes of death

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

the very idea of entirely dismissing a theory in order to bolster a hypothesis is ridiculous if not remarkable

on the one hand, you dismiss Murder as a cause of death because it was never proved
on the other hand, you hypothesize the organs were a means of profit without providing a bill of sale

[Fiver]

The purpose of medical schools obtaining bodies and body parts was to teach would-be doctors, and I would suggest that a human head would have been an invaluable asset for just that purpose, and I am sure that when medical schools obtained complete bodies the heads were studied as much as the rest of the body.

The purpose of medical schools obtaining bodies was to teach their students about anatomy. That means they needed whole bodies, not random severed body parts. Fortunately, the the Anatomy Act of 1832 had made it easy for medical schools to obtain whole bodies with zero risk that they would be helping a murderer conceal and profit from their crimes.

[Fiver]

You need to read up on the activities of body dealers in 1888.

It's your theory, so the burden of proof is on you. So far you have provided no evidence that there were still body dealers almost 50 years after the passage of the anatomy act. And you aren't theorizing body dealers, you're theorizing organ dealers, who would be spending large amounts of time and effort to make their product less valuable and then wasting much of the product by throwing it away.

[rjpalmer]

Like many things in Ripperolgy, researchers have created mysteries when there are none to be created.

It's curious, then, that the contemporaries referred to these affairs as "The Whitehall Mystery," the "Battersea Mystery", etc. etc., when there was no mystery--just the wild imagination of later researchers.

I have no idea what this statement is even supposed to mean, Trevor.

[Fiver]

Let me ask you several questions you just need to answer yes or no

1. Do You accept that there were back street medicos who carried out a number of different illegal practices?
2. Do you accept that some women died as a result of some of these back-street medical procedures?
3. Do you accept that body dealers were operating in and around Whitechapel at the time of these occurrences?
4. Do you accept that Elizabeth Jackson's body and the missing foetus and her death could have been attributable to a back street medical procedure resulting in her death and possibly the death of her unborn child? Because in the grand scheme of things I only need to prove one case to put the other torsos in the "could have been category"

1 - Yes
2- Yes
3 - No. You have provided zero evidence that organ dealers ever existed. You have provided zero evidence that body dealers still existed in 1888.
4 - Yes. Jackspn's death could have been due to a botched abortion.
4b - No. Putting the other cases in the "could have been category" requires showing that the appropriate organs of the other victims were missing or so heavily decomposed that period doctors would not have been able to tell if the victim had been pregnant.

[Fiver]

You mean like:

Juwes = Jurors
Apron = sanitary towel
Missing organs = rogue mortician

PC Marriott has never been one to let facts get in the way of a perfectly bad theory.

[Pcdunn]

I don't know about organized trades in organs in London, but in America, Francis Tumblety was said to have a collection of wombs he liked to show people. (Reference for this is likely an article I read somewhere on this site.)

And H.H. Holmes was discovered to have boiled down his murder victims and sold their skeletons to medical schools. (Reference for this is the book, "The Devil in the White City.")

Still, skeletons are a far cry from whole or dismembered bodies. And female organs in glass jars kept by mad "doctors" veers into horror movie terrain.

[Trevor Marriott]

the very idea of entirely dismissing a theory in order to bolster a hypothesis is ridiculous if not remarkable

on the one hand, you dismiss Murder as a cause of death because it was never proved
on the other hand, you hypothesize the organs were a means of profit without providing a bill of sale

The trade in bodies and organs was illegal so there was no such thing as a bill of sale

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

It's your theory, so the burden of proof is on you. So far you have provided no evidence that there were still body dealers almost 50 years after the passage of the anatomy act. And you aren't theorizing body dealers, you're theorizing organ dealers, who would be spending large amounts of time and effort to make their product less valuable and then wasting much of the product by throwing it away.

Read Professor Elizabeth Hurrans's books on the activities of body dealers in and around Whitechapel

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

It's curious, then, that the contemporaries referred to these affairs as "The Whitehall Mystery," the "Battersea Mystery", etc. etc., when there was no mystery--just the wild imagination of later researchers.

I have no idea what this statement is even supposed to mean, Trevor.

Its simple RJ researchers have made these torsos into murder mysteries when they can't even prove a cause of death so there can be no murder mysteries

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk