Lechmere the serial killer?

[Fisherman]

Not really Fisherman. When you're right such as on the fact that the Torso Murders were murders I'll agree with you.

Cheers John

Mmmm. It just seemed to me that you are disinclined to agree with me, no matter what. But that may of course be my misinterpretation of things only. You could well be a thoroughly discerning man, completely unlikely to let any animosity govern what calls you make, and always able to set aside your personal feelings in favour of an enlightened perspectice.

As an aside, it is not an established fact that the torso matters were murders. It is a near certainty. So this time over, we only nearly agree.

[John Wheat]

As an aside, it is not an established fact that the torso matters were murders. It is a near certainty. So this time over, we only nearly agree.

True although I'm sure you'll admit that to categorically state or even just suggest that the Torso Murders never happened and that they were for instance the remains of bodies that medico's had studied or something is a bit silly.

Cheers John

[Fisherman]

True although I'm sure you'll admit that to categorically state or even just suggest that the Torso Murders never happened and that they were for instance the remains of bodies that medico's had studied or something is a bit silly.

Cheers John

I would even go a bit further and state that is outright bonkers, John. But I would not be able to deprive those who promote the idea of their favourite chewing bone - murder cannot be decisively proven.

[Pcdunn]

Unless, as this young husband in Texas did, you save the evidence of your crime:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/texas-man-beheaded-wife-put-head-freezer-article-1.2767544

They said he confessed while being handcuffed, but the blood all over him was probably another good clue. Thank God the children were all right.

[Fisherman]

Unless, as this young husband in Texas did, you save the evidence of your crime:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/texas-man-beheaded-wife-put-head-freezer-article-1.2767544

They said he confessed while being handcuffed, but the blood all over him was probably another good clue. Thank God the children were all right.

One wonders what plans he had for the severed head of his wife, keeping it in the freezer...?

[Columbo]

Hi, Trevor.

I have read what Dr. Biggs has to say about the issue.
I don't intend to be discourteous to Dr. Biggs but it seems as if he might have been addressing specific queries, perhaps provided by yourself, rather than offering an entirely objective review of the case notes.
It appears as if he does not have a full understanding of the precision of the language used at the time - "When I am describing separated body parts, I'll use terms like 'flap' of skin, 'strip' of skin or perhaps 'bridge' of skin where two pieces haven't entirely separated. These are purely descriptive terms, and have no underlying medical significance. I suspect that the descriptions given in these historical cases were originally just that (i.e. descriptions), but that over the years undue significance has been pinned to the terminology in the hope of somehow finding a 'link' between cases."

He seems unembarrassed to utilise a double negative, while at the same juncture appearing to intimate that those who have gone before him have less understanding of language than himself.

"I'm not saying there is no link between the bodies, of course, I'm just saying that you can't make that link based on similar descriptions of the remains by the medical persons who examined them at the time. I think unfortunately that the original literal, descriptive meaning might have been over-interpreted to try to make something more out of them over the years. "


He further says that " Anyone who has taken the legs off a roast chicken can probably work out that the legs will come off a human with the right encouragement..."
We should firstly note that chicken was not an inexpensive source of protein in the crowded slums of late 19th C. London.
Secondly, we might see that this has little relevance to the case, unless it is soon to be suggested that a kitchen hand has a part in the affair,

Even so, we see that he concludes that " I don't think (from what I have read) that there are sufficient similarities between the cases to conclude that the same 'killer' dismembered the bodies.

Equally, they could have been the work of the same individual, as there is nothing that can be used to conclude that a different individual must have done the deed." and then follows that with "Essentially, these two individuals 'could' have been killed by the same person, or by different individuals. There is no way of telling one scenario from the other based purely on the pattern of body dismemberment.".

Rather ambiguous, surely?

And irregardless of Dr. Biggs position, although his final conclusion seems less than beneficial to your argument, he is merely reviewing, from a distance, evidence that was drawn up by the very doctors you seem to suggest are wrong in their beliefs, even though they had the bodies there in front of them and held those fractured parts in their hands.

Yours, Caligo

Nice Post.

Columbo

[Columbo]

We do know that, Insp Reid who was in charge of Whitechapel CID and who visited the crime scene and in whose hands the file would have passed before being sent to Swanson tells us in The NOW article in 1896 that no organs were taken away.

Just to clarify and to be specific. The organs were found to be missing from Chapman and Eddowes when the post mortems were carried out. There is no evidence that shows they were found to be missing prior to this with regards to either victims and so it not conclusive that the killer removed the organs.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hi Trevor,

Sorry for the late post, but according to the reports organs would only be discovered missing at the post mortem since no detailed inspection was done at the crime scene. Kelly was also missing her heart. Do you have a theory as to why the killer would disembowel and not take organs?

Columbo