Is Jack someone we have never heard of?

[Jon Guy]

It`s close enough for Ripper suspectology, Phil.

[Michael W Richards]

Does anyone else on this forum believe that Jack the Ripper could be someone who has never been identified, named, suspected or written about?

Helena

Hi Helena,

I believe that the real question is whether there indeed was any single Jack, or whether the murders were so tightly grouped and some so similar that the contemporary officials had little other choice but to place them in a folder as a group. Which is exactly what happened. Not a Canonical Group mind you,...but a group of unsolved murders of Unfortunates living in Whitechapel/Spitalfield that were committed with a knife and often involved some form of mutilation.

The number of files in that folder was I believe 11 or 12...I think Carrie Brown is often added to that list by some.

Having said that, I believe the first 2 Canonical murders were committed by a known suspect and due to his institutionalization, the subsequent murders were committed by others. Since those first two murders are so close in methodology, signature and victimology its not hard for me to tie them to one man. But which man?

I believe the man seen bloodied in the pub the morning that Annie was killed is most probably her killer, and I think its likely Jacob Isenschmid...as our own Lynn Cates suggests in his recent article.

I think that killer was responsible for the name that was created for him, and so therefore, if he was guilty, Jacob could conceivably be called Jack.

Rippers, at least in my language, Rip. Which makes the Eddowes murder quite interesting to me personally...she was also ripped. But as I said, I think its possible that when she was killed the man that earned the title Jack had nothing to do with it. He was under lock and key.

Cheers.

[Michael W Richards]

Except the mode of dismemberment was described as identical in all four torso cases 1887-89, including Pinchin Street. Smooth cutting of the skin around the joints in the same direction to expose the joints and then the joints neatly disarticulated and finally sawn through with a fine tooth saw. Is the location of the find more important than a match in the mode of dismemberment?

Hi Debra,

I believe by the above you've come to the same conclusion as I did about the Torsos......one man. Its a very specific kind of activity...and it doesnt appear the bodies were cut up to facilitate discreet disposal.

I would think that this person must have read the papers with great interest in the Fall of 88. And maybe a smile......amateurs.

All the best.

[Jon Guy]

.... see what I mean.

[Debra A]

Hi Debra,

I believe by the above you've come to the same conclusion as I did about the Torsos......one man. Its a very specific kind of activity...and it doesnt appear the bodies were cut up to facilitate discreet disposal.

I would think that this person must have read the papers with great interest in the Fall of 88. And maybe a smile......amateurs.

All the best.

Hi Mike,
I'm just stating a fact as noted by the doctors that I've been saying for years, plus asking Lechmere a question into the bargain!

[Phil H]

It`s close enough for Ripper suspectology, Phil.

I have just one word for you - "JUWES"

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,
I would disagree about the vault at Whitehall being a public place, although I agree Pinchin Street was. The Whitehall torso was found in a damp dark dificult to access vault, as noted by men working at the site at the time. One lower leg was also found burried under a mound of earth at the same site. It was even mentioned that insider knowledge may have been required to find the vault as it was so tucked away. This seems to me like a victim very much hidden rather than put on display? Much is made of the fact that this was the building site of New Scotland Yard but if there was a message in leaving the torso there what was the message? If Bond and Hebbert are to be belived, then this murder came before the murder of Polly Nichols.

Regarding mutilations on the torso victims, Elizabeth Jackson had one of the most horrific mutilations inflicted on her, her unborn child removed from her womb after death.
This was possibly to aid dismemberment but it's not difficult to imagine a serial killer who removed organs from his victims, like I think Jack was, being curious about a gravid uterus, which would be the prominent feature when opening up Elizabeth's abdomen.

This is way off topic though.

Hi Debra
Thanks for the response. Thats why i love this forum-You never know how or to what part of your post people will respond to and what new things you learn from it. I was surprised to see that both you and another poster brought up the same thing that the whitehall torso cannot really be considered public as it was so "tucked" away. I did not realize that it was left so out of the place there but apparently it was-learn something new every day. However, unless some attempt was made to bury and/or conceal the whole thing, i dont see how anyone, killer included, could think that it would not be discovered IMHO. But I take your point-perhaps it was meant never to be found.

Much is made of the fact that this was the building site of New Scotland Yard but if there was a message in leaving the torso there what was the message?

Nice new building you got going there coppers-heres a nice little house warming gift.

Regarding mutilations on the torso victims, Elizabeth Jackson had one of the most horrific mutilations inflicted on her, her unborn child removed from her womb after death.
This was possibly to aid dismemberment but it's not difficult to imagine a serial killer who removed organs from his victims, like I think Jack was, being curious about a gravid uterus, which would be the prominent feature when opening up Elizabeth's abdomen.

Totally agree.

This is way off topic though

So i will bring it round. I actually think that there is a very slightly more chance that we have heard of him mentioned somewhere before, if not a major suspect, then someone suspected, or even a name mentioned in connection with the case. One of the reasons I think this is that IMHO overall the police at the time and researchers since then have done a pretty good job of trying to find the suspect. Another reason is that i beleive that there is a pretty good chance that Blotchy was Mary kelly's murderer and JtR.

[Phil H]

Much is made of the fact that this was the building site of New Scotland Yard but if there was a message in leaving the torso there what was the message?

Nice new building you got going there coppers-heres a nice little house warming gift.

That's certainly a message.

But IF (and that's a big assumption) the body parts were indeed put there as a deliberate taunt, then is it not possible that the killer (or whomever left the torso etc there - which may not be the same person) was saying something deeper?

It could be anything from an almost black-magic curse on the new HQ, to a "there's no place safe from me". Or even, "can't you see me under your own noses" or "look how stupid the police are."

On balance I think the perpetrator probably never knew more than that it was a building site, but if not then....

Phil H

[Debra A]

However, unless some attempt was made to bury and/or conceal the whole thing, i dont see how anyone, killer included, could think that it would not be discovered IMHO. But I take your point-perhaps it was meant never to be found.



Nice new building you got going there coppers-heres a nice little house warming gift.

Hi Abby, if we believe Drs Bond and Hebbert, then the body was well enough concealed to not be discovered for at least six weeks after dumping. They concluded the murder occured some time towards the end of August.

[Debra A]

[B]

"there's no place safe from me".

But in this scenario who would "me" be?

[Phil H]

But in this scenario who would "me" be?

Well, it would suggest to me someone above the working class - in that he had to be informed enough to know the use of the building; confident enough to get in and leave the torso etc; and arrogant and witty enough to leave the police a subtle message.

But I think the torso was not intended to be found, or not quickly, otherwise it might have had some unmistakable message on it or near it - a note? or have been followed up by a letter when not found at once.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby, if we believe Drs Bond and Hebbert, then the body was well enough concealed to not be discovered for at least six weeks after dumping. They concluded the murder occured some time towards the end of August.

Good point.

And it got me thinking-if it was not meant to be discovered, perhaps the killer put it there as his own little sick joke. Like-"no matter how smart you police think you are you all are working in a building where there is a dead murdered body right under your noses." The killer taking some kind of sick satisfaction in it. The cops are stupid-he is brilliant. He is superior to the police.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby, if we believe Drs Bond and Hebbert, then the body was well enough concealed to not be discovered for at least six weeks after dumping. They concluded the murder occured some time towards the end of August.

Hi Again Debra
All this talk about whitehall has distracted me from the main point of my original post (plus the fact that no one commented on it) that is-what do you think of the idea that if JtR and Torso Murderer are the same person it may be due to the fact that the torso murders were done when the killer could kill in his home and the JtR murderes were ones where he could not?

[Phil H]

what do you think of the idea that if JtR and Torso Murderer are the same person it may be due to the fact that the torso murders were done when the killer could kill in his home and the JtR murderes were ones where he could not?

I know the question was addressed to Debra, and i am no criminologist...

but has any known killer ever operated in such a way - having two MOs for different situations?

It doesn't ring true to me.

Phil H

[Lechmere]

Debra
I don't think we can say with any degree of certainty that the torso murders were the work of one person on the basis of supposed method of dismemberment, given the level of medical knowledge at the time and the different medicos involved in each case.
The Whitehall, Rainham and Jackson cases all had parts washing up on the Thames.
Pinchin Street didn't.