I think I have found him.

[Hunter]

Hello All. Actually, since I have been with Casebook, we've had 2 similar posts. Both purported to have a solution, the language was similar, but the poster left and never returned.

Short version: I think you've been had.

History repeats itself for a reason.

[John G]

That is why I suggested the inland finds would be most useful in assessing how widespread the dump sites were, John. These sites alone are controlled by the perpetrator.
The problem is, no one agrees which of the torso cases are linked, if any, to one killer. If we exclude, say- the Tottenham case where a jury found the victim had died as the result of abortion, then we have less inland dump sites.
Only Elizabeth Jackson was identified in the torso case so it is impossible to establish where the victims were taken from, also.

Hello Debra,

Yes, I agree. Assuming that some of these crimes are linked, the only definitive connection we have thus far is with Thames. And, of course, that also applies to the possible abduction site of the only identified victim, Liz Jackson, who'd been living rough on the embankment. However, if we are dealing with a serial killer, then it seems inevitable that he's a commuter killer rather than a marauder.

I have suggested in the past that a boat may have been used, i.e. to aid disposal, and I still feel that's a possibility. It would certainly explain the link to the Thames which, of course, also applies to one of the inland dump sites, the Scotland Yard building on the embankment.

A difficulty, however, is that the individual(s) responsible for the disposing may not have been the same individual(s) responsible for the victims death.
Another problem with the disposal sites is the motive of the perpetrator: were they chosen for convenience, were they just random, or was the perpetrator trying to make some sort of statement, as possibility indicated by, say, Whitehall and Pinchin Street?

I agree that Tottenham is one of the least likely to be a case of murder, however, I'm still intrigued by the risky choice of dump site. As for the jury's verdict of death as a consequence of an abortion, I'm not sure as to the extent to which the medical evidence supports such a conclusion: from memory I can't remember if Dr Lloyd expressed any firm opinions regarding the probable cause of death, although I don't see how anyone could be certain the a botched abortion was the cause. Nonetheless, this case perfectly illustrates that covering up a murder wasn't the only possible reason to dismember a victim.

[John G]

Hi John
Any opinion give by Prof Wilson, or any other profiler for that matter is nothing more than a stab in the dark, simply because one of the main reasons is that it cannot be positively ascertained that all the victims were killed by the same hand.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hello Trevor,

Good point. It does, however, seem a virtual certainty that some of the victims are linked, the difficulty is which ones and in what way? Thus, is there one serial killer or several serial killers? If there was a serial killer or killers, did they operate alone or with an accomplice? Are some of the crimes gang related, which is also a question that may be asked of the Torso crimes. Or are possibly dealing with a local conspiracy, which the Austin murder may suggest? Frankly, the possibilities seem endless: its's like one step forward and about eight steps back!

However, one thing is certain is that all of the Whitechapel victims were killed within a very small geographical area, so any serial killer(s) would surely have to be categorized as a marauder rather than or a commuter. Or local gang, of course!

[Debra A]

Others may not accept it so readily.



www.trevormarriott.co.uk

..the ones those whose theory it doesn't suit you mean?

[Patrick S]

... and then there are those who like to have their theories scrutinized, but who dislike when it is said that there has been a complete debunking of them. Not because they cannot stand the idea of a complete debunking but because the alleged debunking was never there.

Criticism is ALWAYS a good thing - if it is fair and factually underpinned. If it is not, then it is NEVER a good thing. It really is that easy.

Says he with the completely debunked theory.

[Debra A]

As I said a good paper exercise and to those whose theory it suits will applaud it. Others may not accept it so readily.

I will draw you attention to Amelia Dyer who was murdering babies in 1895 and parceling the bodies up and throwing them in the Thames around Reading. Following her arrest a search was made of the river nearby and six other parceled up murdered babies were found. So it doesn't necessaril follow that the tides will move objects along the water for some considerable distances.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Is the Thames even tidal in the Reading area Dyer dumped those bodies in?
It is in the areas the torsos 87-89 were found.

[Joshua Rogan]

The Thames is tidal as far upstream as Teddington Lock, but nowhere near Reading.
That study you posted looks interesting Debra. I was going to attempt something similar, but I never got round to it as I read that the police at the time thought there wouldn't have been much movement up or down stream. Apparently, all those bends on the river tend to throw any flotsam to the outside of the first bend it reaches, where it stays. So they concluded the parts were dumped near to where they were found. I'm not sure how true that is, but it sounds reasonable - especially for the parts found on dry land.

[The Good Michael]

Hi Pierre,

I know exactly who you're talking about, and yes, I too..along with a group of 27 others have come to the same conclusion about who we believe JTR was. And it's the one you are also onto for sure. We also were dismayed and didn't want it to be that man who is not actually named Jack. It is odd that such a well-known (in Victorian times) person hadn't been considered seriously before we found him, but without the recent evidence, he would have dwelt in obscurity. Thank heaven for good newspaper archives and the Old Bailey, eh?
The only question I (we) have remaining is why someone who was so famous for that thing he did that made him famous, would have been interested in killing so many women in London. What was his motive? Well, we sort of know that answer, but haven't found the absolute proof yet. Perhaps if we compared notes?

Yours,

Mike

[RockySullivan]

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.

You do realize that quote was from you right?

[curious4]

Hello Rivkah

I think the women living in the East End at the time HAD disappeared. There wasn't really any other place to disappear to from there.

Best wishes
C4

[Trevor Marriott]

Is the Thames even tidal in the Reading area Dyer dumped those bodies in?
It is in the areas the torsos 87-89 were found.

I have no technical knowledge but as a layman I might suggest that the river as a river flowing into the sea is subject to tidal flows. I have just read a subsequent post and have found this in answer to your question as to whethr the river would flow

"Above Teddington lock all is peaceful with a steady predictable and controlled flow"

So would parcels containing bodies remain in the part of the river where they were deposited or move with the flow ? I would suggest the latter.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Barrister]

Hi,

I am a researcher and have found some pieces of evidence in the case of Jack the Ripper.

I´m afraid I might have a chance to prove who the killer was. I never wanted to solve this case and I have never taken any specific interest in it. I just happened to find a few data that points to a certain person. This person is not one of the known suspects.

I´m sorry I can´t write specifics about the evidence but I have old (known) data as well as new. The data can connect this person to five of the canonical murders and two of the dismemberment murders.

The data also provide us with the real motive of the murders. The motive is not one of the earlier suggested motives. The data about his own life also explain why he used certain methods and why he managed to escape.

Right now I can only say that Jack the Ripper was much worse than people generally know. He was extremely intelligent and he also killed more victims.

The reason for ending the long killing spree from 1888 to 1889 was strictly personal and had nothing to do with insanity or suicide.

I´m planning to go on with the research and I know what data I need to prove who the killer was. There is only some very sparse data I need for this and it is probably not impossible to find.

My biggest problem right now is that I worry about revealing to the world who he was if the data turn out positive. Nobody will like the results. So I still hope I have the wrong suspect and that the data, if I find it, will be negative.

Pierre

Pierre,
Congratulations on your discovery and good luck with the continuing research. As for never having been a Ripperologist before, don't feel alone. The subject sucks you in like quicksand. I perfectly understand you don't want to disclose your hypothesis. Since you are new to Ripperology, I suggest you affiliate with one of the more established and knowledgable persons in the field. He or she can provide extensive background and, possibly, financial assistance in tracing and supporting the evidence you have found as well as providing context from his wealth of information. This subject is like an amoeba. It just keeps growing on its own but if you can truly solve the case you will be a hero and a celebrity. Godspeed in your quest.

[jerryd]

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!

John,

In the Whitehall Mystery thread in post #879, you wrote:

Hi Jon,

Not by me- 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!

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!

I'm sure your reaching the title of "Inspector" has given you much more knowledge now than you had in July of this year, so I understand the complete 180 in your thought process.

[curious4]

Pierre,
Congratulations on your discovery and good luck with the continuing research. As for never having been a Ripperologist before, don't feel alone. The subject sucks you in like quicksand. I perfectly understand you don't want to disclose your hypothesis. Since you are new to Ripperology, I suggest you affiliate with one of the more established and knowledgable persons in the field. He or she can provide extensive background and, possibly, financial assistance in tracing and supporting the evidence you have found as well as providing context from his wealth of information. This subject is like an amoeba. It just keeps growing on its own but if you can truly solve the case you will be a hero and a celebrity. Godspeed in your quest.

Hero? No he won't. If JTR is positively identified, what will we all do in our spare time! :-)

C4

[John G]

John,

In the Whitehall Mystery thread in post #879, you wrote:

Hi Jon,

Not by me- 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!



I'm sure your reaching the title of "Inspector" has given you much more knowledge now than you had in July of this year, so I understand the complete 180 in your thought process.

I've absolutely no idea what your inferring, and i'm not sure you do either. If you'd read both posts you cited carefully you would note that I've commended Dr Phillips in both! For instance, his opinion that the mutilations inflicted on the Pinchin Street Torso were to aid disposal of the body, and that Kelly was killed by a different perpetrator, are deserving of respect. In fact, I agree with him! Something you would realize if you'd taken the trouble to trawl through a few more of my posts.