Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Francis Hermans - Update - Solid evidence of him being in vicinity of torso murders.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

    There are other matters that are much more urgent, Trevor. Starting with the ridiculous idea that a body cannot be cut up in many different ways, moving past the notion that victorian medicos were engaing in guesswork only and finishing at the whopper of a suggestion that there were numerous killers on the loose in Whitechapel in 1888 who generously opened women up to facilitate for organsnatchers to go about their business in the morgues. THAT, if anything, is "guesswork".
    But I have told you all of this many times already, as has most posters out here, and we have all come to realize that it is like pouring water on a goose. All we get in return is the stale old mumbling about how we are not willing to offer a fresh look at things, instead opring for the same old, same old. The pathetic thing about that is how you are completely unwilling to accept anything, no matter how fresh it is, if it is not in line with the nonsense you tout.

    I really should not get drawn into these discussions with you. Nor should anybody else. It is a complete waste of time and energy, and it offers a scene for ideas that have no place in the real world.

    Goodbye.

    Again you put pen to paper without engaging your brain first.

    I bet you have not even bothered to purchase and my book in which Dr Biggs covers in great detail all the issues you seek to rely on to prop up your theory

    No one is suggesting multiple killers, that's your interpretation of my posts and you misguided belief that all the torsos were murdered by the same hand that murdered the Whitechapel victims of which if the torsos were murdered is the complete opposite of the killers MO to WM.

    The suggestion is and has always been that the killer of Eddowes and Chapman did not remove the organs from the victims at the crime scene.

    Your quote
    "Starting with the ridiculous idea that a body cannot be cut up in many different ways, moving past the notion that victorian medicos were engaing in guesswork only
    and finishing at the whopper of a suggestion that there were numerous killers on the loose in Whitechapel in 1888 who generously opened women up to facilitate for organ snatchers to go about their business in the morgues"

    Again we evidence from you in making things up. No one not even I have suggested that the killer of these women was deliberately killing them for the purpose of removing organs and selling them on. Stop making things up !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Can you not grasp the fact that if two bodies are taken to two different mortuaries and when examined and compared they show that the extractions were carried out by using two different methods, the first Chapman was a successful removal, the second a botched attempt at the removal, but in both cases anatomical knowledge was seen.

    If it suggested the same killer,and that the killer removed the organs at the crime scene, why was he not able to remove Chapman organs in a proficient way? after successfully performing a much more difficult removal of Chapmans organs?

    It seem to me that you have created a murder mystery about the Torsos where there is none to be created, basing your theory on the fact that the killer removed organs from the Whitechapel victims, so when the torsos were missing vital organs you think it was the same killer. I think you need to take a step back and re evaluate your research. Any body with a modicum of common sense can see your theory is flawed.

    And I am still waiting for you to produce the evidence to show the actual causes of death of the torsos. I suspect I will be waiting a long time and I am out of this pointless discussion with you

    www.trevormarriott.co.uk

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott;

      I am out of this pointless discussion with you

      [url
      www.trevormarriott.co.uk[/url]
      Thank you! Strictly speaking, you were never in it in the first place.
      Last edited by Fisherman; 03-03-2021, 11:57 AM.

      Comment


      • Another battle of wits with unarmed men Trevor.
        Michael Richards

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
          Another battle of wits with unarmed men Trevor.
          Yes, I know. I only do it for courtesy’ s sake. But don’ t let that phase you - get armed like the rest of us!

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

            Yes, I know. I only do it for courtesy’ s sake. But don’ t let that phase you - get armed like the rest of us!
            Didnt take your side with the initial comment to Trevor Fish, but twisting facts is your forte right?
            Michael Richards

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

              Didnt take your side with the initial comment to Trevor Fish, but twisting facts is your forte right?
              No - but YOUR forte is claiming that I do. Most people are quite aware of that, though, but it seems you may need to be informed?

              By the way, this is a non- response message. Meaning that whatever you concoct to answer me, it will go unanswered by me. Trust me, it is best that way.

              How about the rest of us return to the aim of the thread and skip the mudslinging?

              Comment


              • By all means, the fiction is afoot.....
                Michael Richards

                Comment


                • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post
                  It's certainly an interesting case. A more bloodthirsty version of Severin Klosowski.

                  But if I'm looking at it correctly, it looks like he and his wife Emmeline had a son baptized in Horsham in 1891. So they apparently moved to the Horsham area sometime between 1882 and 1891.

                  You'll want to find out where Samuel was born in Dec 1887. I'm not immediately seeing it.

                  Samuel Hermans
                  Male
                  Birth: 3 Dec 1887
                  Baptism: 22 Mar 1891
                  Wesleyan Methodist Chapel, Horsham, Surrey, England
                  Francis Hermans
                  Emmeline
                  1278932
                  1821
                  Not sure why this places Horsham in Surrey. Perhaps a misreading of handwritten records by a transcriber? Horsham is in West Sussex. it's also on the main railway line from Bognor Regis and Portsmouth to London so the journey to and from London Victoria is a straightforward as it could be.
                  "It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins twisting facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts." Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (as Sherlock Holmes).

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X