Was JtR a necrophile?

[jerryd]

The claim is that Jackson got them at a flee market right?

She purchased them used, yes.

[Batman]

Another of MJK's aliases was Lizze Fisher. The undergarments of Elizabeth Jackson had the name L.E. Fisher written on them. And also, coincidentally, Lizzie Fisher is the name of one of Catherine Eddowes sisters.

The claim is that Jackson got them at a flee market right?

[jerryd]

Another of MJK's aliases was Lizze Fisher. The undergarments of Elizabeth Jackson had the name L.E. Fisher written on them. And also, coincidentally, Lizzie Fisher is the name of one of Catherine Eddowes sisters.

[jerryd]

Hello Rocky, John,

Elizabeth Jackson's last known address was 14 Turks Row, close to Chelsea Barracks. The interesting thing about this is the fact that Chelsea Barracks housed the 2nd Battalion, Scots Guards. According to Paul Begg's research the Guards transferred to Dublin in August 1888 and then to Curragh where they stayed until returning to Chelsea Barracks in June of 1889.

Notice the dates, and remember Mary Kelly supposedly had a brother, Johnto, in the 2nd Battalion, Scots Guards.

[RockySullivan]

Hello Rocky,

No, I believe very little is known about the man and the police don't seem to have investigated him. Of course, the first Torso victim was discovered in 1873 in Battersea, so Richard Lawrence would have been about 25 then. Interestingly, the Times reporter who reported on the Whitehall Torso was of the opinion that whoever left the body must have been familiar with the layout of the building, i.e. because it would have been problematic getting to the exact spot where the torso was found, not least because of the darkness.

The foreman was also convinced of the same and I've read the workers came under suspicion at the inquest.

[John G]

John, wow that sounds like a good lead right there. Was the man ever identified? Sounds like someone the police would want to speak with

Hello Rocky,

No, I believe very little is known about the man and the police don't seem to have investigated him. Of course, the first Torso victim was discovered in 1873 in Battersea, so Richard Lawrence would have been about 25 then. Interestingly, the Times reporter who reported on the Whitehall Torso was of the opinion that whoever left the body must have been familiar with the layout of the building, i.e. because it would have been problematic getting to the exact spot where the torso was found, not least because of the darkness.

[RockySullivan]

Hello Rocky,

Intriguingly MJR was initially referred to in some press reports as Mary Jane Lawrence. This seems to have been based on information supplied by a neighbour who stated that a man called Lawrence used to visit her from time to time- she assumed they were married.

John, wow that sounds like a good lead right there. Was the man ever identified? Sounds like someone the police would want to speak with

Apparently mrs Hewitt was the neighbor although it seems Lawrence remains a mystery man. He's described a drover who "lives with a dead woman(?)" perhaps a more accurate statement than mrs Hewitt realized ha ha

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=7153

A woman named Mrs. Hewitt, living at 25, Dorset-street, supplied our reporter with some information. She said she was up till twelve o'clock last night. She heard nothing. Her husband was up at four o'clock each morning, and he heard nothing of a disturbing character. At eleven o'clock this morning she had occasion to look out of the window which affords a view of the court; but she could see nothing. At about half-past eleven she heard the shouts of a mob, and she then discovered that a horrible murder - it makes me shiver to think of it, she said - had been committed. She also stated that a man - a drover - called on her some time ago. He asked her if a summons came in

THE NAME OF LAWRENCE

to accept it. This man Lawrence, she says, she believes lived with the dead woman. He was off and on in London, sometimes being absent for five or six weeks.

[John G]

Jerry, I think so. In one version Young asks Lawrence to place the tools in the vault, in the second version young places then there himself. Sharp eye although it could be the press getting it wrong. Sounds like they can't keep their stories straight. Lawrence is a particular POI as he's from battersea and I think only him & young kept their tools in this specific section of the vault. We might be on the right trail here

Hello Rocky,

Intriguingly MJR was initially referred to in some press reports as Mary Jane Lawrence. This seems to have been based on information supplied by a neighbour who stated that a man called Lawrence used to visit her from time to time- she assumed they were married.

[RockySullivan]

You may be right Rocky,

Can you see the problem with these two statements?

Richard Lawrence, labourer, 40, Sterndale-road, Battersea, stated that on the Saturday he placed for safety, at the end of the vault, on a mortar board, until the following Monday morning, a basket of workmen's tools, and on the latter day, at ten minutes past six o'clock in the morning, he fetched them out. On neither occasion did he notice anything extraordinary. The tools had not been disturbed in the meantime. A fellow workman (Young) had asked him to take the tools there. About half-past three o'clock that afternoon he saw, for the first and the last time, the parcel of remains as it was brought out into the light. The body might have been there at the time he groped in the dark into the vault, but he was strongly impressed with the idea that it was not.

Alfred Young, carpenters' labourer, stated that on the Saturday, about twelve o'clock, before the finding of the parcel of remains, he went to the vault, taking with him a basket of workmen's tools, and placed it on the mortar board to which the last witness had referred, but he noticed nothing particular in this place. There was no light or lamp.

Jerry, I think so. In one version Young asks Lawrence to place the tools in the vault, in the second version young places then there himself. Sharp eye although it could be the press getting it wrong. Sounds like they can't keep their stories straight. Lawrence is a particular POI as he's from battersea and I think only him & young kept their tools in this specific section of the vault. We might be on the right trail here

[jerryd]

More I look into the whitehall case the more I suspect one of the workers is involved.

You may be right Rocky,

Can you see the problem with these two statements?

Richard Lawrence, labourer, 40, Sterndale-road, Battersea, stated that on the Saturday he placed for safety, at the end of the vault, on a mortar board, until the following Monday morning, a basket of workmen's tools, and on the latter day, at ten minutes past six o'clock in the morning, he fetched them out. On neither occasion did he notice anything extraordinary. The tools had not been disturbed in the meantime. A fellow workman (Young) had asked him to take the tools there. About half-past three o'clock that afternoon he saw, for the first and the last time, the parcel of remains as it was brought out into the light. The body might have been there at the time he groped in the dark into the vault, but he was strongly impressed with the idea that it was not.

Alfred Young, carpenters' labourer, stated that on the Saturday, about twelve o'clock, before the finding of the parcel of remains, he went to the vault, taking with him a basket of workmen's tools, and placed it on the mortar board to which the last witness had referred, but he noticed nothing particular in this place. There was no light or lamp.

[RockySullivan]

Dr Bond thinks that the worker was wrong who claimed the parts had not been there long. His testimony is very interesting and his medical opinion indicates the workers were wrong. I don't see how they could not notice. I think they may have been lying. More I look into the whitehall case the more I suspect one of the workers is involved.

Mr. Thomas Bond, F.R.C.S., was again examined. He said: - I was sent for to the Embankment site of the new police offices on the 17th. I went into the recess of the vault where the body was found, and I found there a human leg partially buried. It was uncovered; but it had not been removed from the place where it was found. I examined the earth which had covered it, and I found that this gave unmistakable evidence of having covered the leg for several weeks - that the leg had been there for several weeks. Decomposition had taken place there, and it was not decomposed when placed there. The upper part of the leg was in a good state of preservation; but the foot had decomposed, and the skin and nails had peeled off. The limb was removed, and next morning it was examined by Mr. Hibbert and myself. We found that the leg had been divided at the knee joint by free incisions, and very cleverly disarticulated without injury to the cartilages. The limb and foot agreed with the arm and hand in general character - in general contour and in size. We had no doubt that the leg belonged to the body and to the arm. I took the opportunity, I may say, while in the vault to examine the spot where the body was found, and I am quite sure that the last witness is wrong as to the body not having been there a few days before. The body must have lain there for weeks, and it had decomposed there.

The CORONER. - You think it had decomposed in that spot?

Mr. Bond. - Yes, the decomposition was of a character of a body only partially exposed to the air. The brickwork against which it had leant was deeply covered with the decomposed fluid of the human body turned black, and it could not have done that in a day or two. The stain is not superficial, but the brick work is quite saturated. I should think it must have been there quite six weeks when found - from August. There was no mark of a garter on the leg, and there were no corns on the foot, which was well shaped. (Times - 23 October 1888)

Bond casebook page

[Rosella]

I think so too. Even with a reconnoitre on the Saturday afternoon it's unlikely that anyone approaching the site from the river side (the direction he came from, I believe) it would be virtually impossible for someone to dig in those vaults and leave a parcel unless they knew exactly what they were doing.

I am becoming more and more convinced too that Torso killer had, at the very least, a cart of some description (Pinchin St) and access to a workplace and receptacle where he could dissect the bodies and store the pieces.

[RockySullivan]

Personally I think the fetus was probably Jackson's and the dr made an error. I also like erratas theory that Jackson was killed for her fetus...to replace the one in the pickle jar.

I believe the key to this mystery lies deep in the whitehall vault. As I've stated I don't think the killer found this location by casing, he's been there before and knew it very well. It can't be a very long list of people who knew the place so well.

[John G]

The existence of placenta made it clear that Liz Jackson had been pregnant and the foetus was removed by the killer. However, Dr Kempster was of the opinion that the foetus in the pickle jar did not come from the victim. It should also be noted that infanticide and back street abortion was relatively common in Victorian England, so this probably represents a more likely explanation.

[Errata]

Are you sure? I could swear I read the doctors saying it was not her fetus and concluding it unrelated

No I wasn't sure, so I checked and apparently they were undecided, some yes, some no. In the thread some people felt that was nonsense because a fetus was taken and then lo, a fetus so what other fetus it could be (fair question I gotta say), and I responded to that. So I think I remembered it wrong because my response was sort of a "Yes we have no bananas" so I forgot the argument was not against the doctor's opinions but other posters' opinions of the doctors opinions.

And they likely did assign the fetus to Elizabeth Jackson for burial. I would be surprised if it was written down anywhere, but once Jackson's remains were released I would bet the fetus was released with them just in case he was hers. We don't know of any other mothers missing, or missing a fetus, and he would have been just developed enough to look human. I don't think the wife of a medical examiner would let her husband bury the baby alone, even if he was inclined to do it. Technically it was nothing more than medical waste, and as such would have been incinerated. But Rocco (I did not name the fetus in a jar don't yell at me) had gotten some press and people knew about him and he likely was put in with Jackson. Unless he's decorating an office, but again, he got some press so unlikely.