I think I have found him.

[RockySullivan]

I do feel that the ripper case will be solved and very possibly by a casebook members. The answer will come through a fresh look at the torso MURDERS which have gone overlooked for over a century. You only have to look at Jerry D's research to see he's onto something and when you couple that with knowledge from someone like Debra's that is a recipe for success. The key is teamwork. But everyone these days seems to have dollars signs in their eyes.

[DJA]

$ $
U
(___)

[RivkahChaya]

And I've just posted the pinchin inquest where the verdict was murder. Your right..if the murder occurred in the street or in the victims residence there is no need for dismemberment and dispersal of parts...but when the murder occurs in the killer's home or work...dismemberment and disposal makes sense. The pinching torso was mutilated in the abdomen just like the ripper victims and the other torsos

I have long thought that the reason MJK is the "last" victim is that JtR simply couldn't return to the streets after finding out what he could do in the privacy of a room, and so he began "working" in the privacy of some space, where he could keep a body longer, and then had to dispose of it differently somehow. He may have kept organs, pleves, and femurs.

So, some of the parts that turned up around London post-MJK may have been from JtR victims, BUT, there was a torso killer at large before MJK, wasn't there? so there were at least two killers operating in London at one time. I have no opinion to which group the Pinchin St. torso belonged, except that isn't it the case that it was the opinion of the MEs at the time that it was not a Ripper victim?

I think that to find further victim, we'll need to look for women who simply disappeared, which is probably a tall order, because a lot of women probably disappeared on purpose, and the population was fairly transient, not to mention, people changed names more often than clothes, it seems.

[RockySullivan]

I have long thought that the reason MJK is the "last" victim is that JtR simply couldn't return to the streets after finding out what he could do in the privacy of a room, and so he began "working" in the privacy of some space, where he could keep a body longer, and then had to dispose of it differently somehow. He may have kept organs, pleves, and femurs.

So, some of the parts that turned up around London post-MJK may have been from JtR victims, BUT, there was a torso killer at large before MJK, wasn't there? so there were at least two killers operating in London at one time. I have no opinion to which group the Pinchin St. torso belonged, except that isn't it the case that it was the opinion of the MEs at the time that it was not a Ripper victim?

I think that to find further victim, we'll need to look for women who simply disappeared, which is probably a tall order, because a lot of women probably disappeared on purpose, and the population was fairly transient, not to mention, people changed names more often than clothes, it seems.

Why would the torsos that appeared after Mary Kelly not be the work of the same torso killer who was in operation before and during the ripper murders? It seems like a common theory the Kelly murder was some kind of revelation for the ripper. To me the Kelly murder is clearly the work of the Torso Ripper when he doesn't have to dismember and dispose of the body because it's in a private environment where he has time do what he wants and doesn't have to clean up.

[RivkahChaya]

Why would the torsos that appeared after Mary Kelly not be the work of the same torso killer who was in operation before and during the ripper murders? It seems like a common theory the Kelly murder was some kind of revelation for the ripper. To me the Kelly murder is clearly the work of the Torso Ripper when he doesn't have to dismember and dispose of the body because it's in a private environment where he has time do what he wants and doesn't have to clean up.

I've never heard that, but it's very interesting. It also puts MJK with victims her own age, and leaves all the Ripper victims women in their 40s. (The non-canonicals are all in their 40s too, or early 50s, IIRC.)

Personally, I always wondered if the heavier-set victims were by one hand, and the thinner women (Eddowes and Kelly, maybe Stride) were by another.

It's always bothered me that Kelly was so much younger, but it might make perfect sense if we could ask the killer-- for example, if he knew Kelly, and the others were strangers, it may have made her more convenient. Or maybe he wanted victims who were unlikely to be pregnant, but did not want very elderly women, because their uteri were shrunken, or he simply didn't find them appealing-- or his mother was an elderly woman. But maybe Kelly was menstruating, and mentioned it, or it was apparent some other way, so he knew she wasn't pregnant. I'm making that up-- that is, not seriously suggesting it, just making the point that we can't really know, but Kelly does seem the odd girl out because of her age, without knowing.

[RockySullivan]

I've never heard that, but it's very interesting. It also puts MJK with victims her own age, and leaves all the Ripper victims women in their 40s. (The non-canonicals are all in their 40s too, or early 50s, IIRC.)

Personally, I always wondered if the heavier-set victims were by one hand, and the thinner women (Eddowes and Kelly, maybe Stride) were by another.

It's always bothered me that Kelly was so much younger, but it might make perfect sense if we could ask the killer-- for example, if he knew Kelly, and the others were strangers, it may have made her more convenient. Or maybe he wanted victims who were unlikely to be pregnant, but did not want very elderly women, because their uteri were shrunken, or he simply didn't find them appealing-- or his mother was an elderly woman. But maybe Kelly was menstruating, and mentioned it, or it was apparent some other way, so he knew she wasn't pregnant. I'm making that up-- that is, not seriously suggesting it, just making the point that we can't really know, but Kelly does seem the odd girl out because of her age, without knowing.

Kellys mutilations have the most in common with liz jackson and they are closer in age than kelly and the ripper victims

[John G]

Laughable!

"Dr Phillip's is one of my heroes! Mind you, some people on this thread don't seem to think that the opinions of any of the medical professionals should count for much-makes you wonder why they bothered to qualify, when there's obviously so many talented amateurs about!"

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=8862&page=88

Laughable? Obviously another one of your intelligently considered and thought- provoking posts! What you continually fail to grasp is that Victorian doctors lacked the acculmative knowledge of today's modern practitioners. It's the same with any science: I admire Aristotle, but I don't think his scientific opinions should be credited the same degree of reverence as a more modern scientist, such as Eintstein! You, no doubt, completely disagree.

[Trevor Marriott]

And I've just posted the pinchin inquest where the verdict was murder. Your right..if the murder occurred in the street or in the victims residence there is no need for dismemberment and dispersal of parts...but when the murder occurs in the killer's home or work...dismemberment and disposal makes sense. The pinching torso was mutilated in the abdomen just like the ripper victims and the other torsos

Dont get carried away as was pointed out the verdicts arrived at were usually on the evidence of the Victorian doctors.

As to a killer killing at his home address or a work place, yes that's possible. However if it is suggested that the victims were street prostitutes. Then the killer would have to have lived or worked close by to the thames, and the victims would also have to have been picked up close by or resided close by. Some of those it would seem did not frequent the Whitechapel area.

You mention place of work. Thats fine if you are a sole trader. But not fine if you work at a factory or other similar premises where others also worked. Again for reason that should be obvious.

Body parts and bodies were quiet common to be fished out of the thames. It should also be noticed that some of the body parts etc were found many miles down the thames. Now i know some will say that this was due to the tides, But being realistic if you are going to try to dispose of a torso, are you not going to try to ensure it is perhaps weighted down to avoid it simply floating around where you throw it in?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[John G]

Why would the torsos that appeared after Mary Kelly not be the work of the same torso killer who was in operation before and during the ripper murders? It seems like a common theory the Kelly murder was some kind of revelation for the ripper. To me the Kelly murder is clearly the work of the Torso Ripper when he doesn't have to dismember and dispose of the body because it's in a private environment where he has time do what he wants and doesn't have to clean up.

Perhaps you've heard of the phrase "hoist by your own petard.". Not a single one of the Victorian doctors you admire linked the Torso victims to the JtR murders. And your hero, Dr Phillips: he believed that the Pinchin Street Torso and MJK were the work of different killers,and that the mutilations in the Pinchin Street case were to aid the disposal of the body, I.e for practical purposes only. So perhaps your right: the Victorian doctors do, indeed, need to be credited for their intelligence!

[GUT]

Perhaps you've heard of the phrase "hoist by your own petard.". Not a single one of the Victorian doctors you admire linked the Torso victims to the JtR murders. And your hero, Dr Phillips: he believed that the Pinchin Street Torso and MJK were the work of different killers,and that the mutilations in the Pinchin Street case were to aid the disposal of the body, I.e for practical purposes only. So perhaps your right: the Victorian doctors do, indeed, need to be credited for their intelligence!

It's pretty normal on Casebook.

How many cling to C5 and ignore everything else Macnaghton says

[Debra A]

Body parts and bodies were quiet common to be fished out of the thames. It should also be noticed that some of the body parts etc were found many miles down the thames. Now i know some will say that this was due to the tides, But being realistic if you are going to try to dispose of a torso, are you not going to try to ensure it is perhaps weighted down to avoid it simply floating around where you throw it in?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Here's an interesting assessment of how Elizabeth Jackson's body parts would have been carried by the Thames tides by someone with real knowledge of the subject, not just guessing - casebook and forums member, John Savage:

http://www.jtrforums.com/showpost.php?p=129868&postcount=17

[John G]

Dont get carried away as was pointed out the verdicts arrived at were usually on the evidence of the Victorian doctors.

As to a killer killing at his home address or a work place, yes that's possible. However if it is suggested that the victims were street prostitutes. Then the killer would have to have lived or worked close by to the thames, and the victims would also have to have been picked up close by or resided close by. Some of those it would seem did not frequent the Whitechapel area.

You mention place of work. Thats fine if you are a sole trader. But not fine if you work at a factory or other similar premises where others also worked. Again for reason that should be obvious.

Body parts and bodies were quiet common to be fished out of the thames. It should also be noticed that some of the body parts etc were found many miles down the thames. Now i know some will say that this was due to the tides, But being realistic if you are going to try to dispose of a torso, are you not going to try to ensure it is perhaps weighted down to avoid it simply floating around where you throw it in?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Excellent post, Trevor.

[John G]

It's pretty normal on Casebook.

How many cling to C5 and ignore everything else Macnaghton says

The problem is when you become obsessed with a pet theory objectivity goes out of the window. I must admit that I've been guilty of this myself, however, now that I've attained the Casebook rank of Inspector I'm obviously far more sensible! Well, most if the time at least!

[Fisherman]

Here's an interesting assessment of how Elizabeth Jackson's body parts would have been carried by the Thames tides by someone with real knowledge of the subject, not just guessing - casebook and forums member, John Savage:

http://www.jtrforums.com/showpost.ph...8&postcount=17

Thanks for that, Debra - I had not seen John Savage´s estimation before. Most interesting!

[Trevor Marriott]

Here's an interesting assessment of how Elizabeth Jackson's body parts would have been carried by the Thames tides by someone with real knowledge of the subject, not just guessing - casebook and forums member, John Savage:

http://www.jtrforums.com/showpost.ph...8&postcount=17

Thank you for that, but good as it is, it is only a paper excercise. There are many factors which may and could have occurred to alter those calculations.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk