Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Evidence of innocence

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

  • Havent read this book, curious though....is it marked clearly as Fiction?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

      Fortunately, or rather, unfortunately, there are dozens and dozens of multiple murderers—mostly late 20th Century American examples, but this doesn’t seem to bother anyone—who, in turn, exhibit all sorts of conflicting behaviors, so one merely needs to find one to fit the current argument. New argument? new serial killer.

      But here’s a thought. Isn’t this Torso Man largely a modern concept? Outside a small number of internal documents—Macnaghten and Hebbert—that noted similarities in three or four ‘torso’ cases, was there any real widespread conviction among the police or the public that there was such a person? It’s not like it was being flaunted in the press the way the Ripper was.

      So, to me, the idea that someone wanted to ‘prove’ a link between the two series puts the cart before the horse. Wouldn’t the killer be more concerned with first showing that the torso cases were linked to begin with? It’s all rather muddled.
      Indeed RJ, which brings me again to Colin Ireland, known as 'The Gay Slayer'. His frustration was with the failure of the police to recognise that any of his victims were linked to a serial predator. They were treating the deaths as independent cases of 'sex games gone wrong', or murder by an abusive partner.

      How clear could Lechmere have made his message linking two series, if the torsos were not even clearly linked to each other?

      Love,

      Caz
      X
      "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


      Comment


      • The Torsorippers (if they were the same of course)reason for pinchin is only known to him, and made perfect sense to his twisted mind-whatever it was. I think it more has to with it was his final hurrah so combined everything from both series, and upping the shock factor by now leaving a torso totally out in the open. It could be a message-who knows? but seems a fitting climax to a combined killer (in his own warped mind)whos made his last kill.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by caz View Post

          Eh? How is that a response to my post which you quoted, where I acknowledged that Lechmere could have sent an anonymous message to say which crimes were connected, without ever needing to 'turn himself in'?

          My example - Colin Ireland - didn't turn himself in. He telephoned the police anonymously to give them information to link his victims.

          Love,

          Caz
          X
          Which is a perfectly logical thing for a narcissist to do. That, however, does not mean that ALL narcissists will contact the police and tell them about their exploits.

          There´s a response for you, Caz.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by caz View Post

            It wasn't me who brought the GSG into this! Mark commented on what Abby wrote about it, and compared the lack of communication skill shown by the author with the fact that the police also failed to get any 'clear' message to link the torso and ripper crimes.

            The anomaly for me is all about how on earth Lechmere could have been such a dismal failure at getting his torso message across, when his 'innocent witness' message had come through loud and clear at the scene of a ripper murder, and again at the inquest. Forget the GSG - that wasn't part of my argument.

            He couldn't have been that frustrated about both series not being recognised as one man's handiwork, or he'd have made the message a lot clearer.

            Love,

            Caz
            X
            I don´t care who brought the GSG into the matter. You very clearly wrote that "Christer's theory suggests Lechmere was a 'terrible communicator'", and Christers theory suggests no such thing at all. Therefore, you misrepresented me in a way that seemed very well shaped to make me look stupid. Now that we can see that your claim is the truly stupid parameter around, it may be time to quote an old Swedish proverb again:

            "Den som gräver en grop åt andra faller ofta själv däri."

            In English? Of course! "He who digs a hole in the ground for others has a tendency to end up in it himself."

            In order not to be a sexist, I will of course allow for changing "he" and "himself" for "she" and "herself".

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
              The Torsorippers (if they were the same of course)reason for pinchin is only known to him, and made perfect sense to his twisted mind-whatever it was. I think it more has to with it was his final hurrah so combined everything from both series, and upping the shock factor by now leaving a torso totally out in the open. It could be a message-who knows? but seems a fitting climax to a combined killer (in his own warped mind)whos made his last kill.
              I kind of agree with you in principle. What befuddles us might have held some personal or ritual significance to the killer. But it's not a working hypothesis. If we're using signature elements and patterns of behaviour to connect murders, we should also flag up when it breaks with convention. Why would a killer who removed organs and eviscerated his victims neglect to do either on this one? Time was not a factor here. He willfully chose not to do it.

              Either way, I feel there is more going on here with the Torsos. The fact there are three separate reports of the dumping sites being predicted before they were found is startling. Once would be a fluke, twice would be coincidence, but three times is a trend. But who was feeding this information and why? Was it some form of mindgames or thrill-seeking? Was John Cleary just a stooge or was he involved on some level?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

                Fortunately, or rather, unfortunately, there are dozens and dozens of multiple murderers—mostly late 20th Century American examples, but this doesn’t seem to bother anyone—who, in turn, exhibit all sorts of conflicting behaviors, so one merely needs to find one to fit the current argument. New argument? new serial killer.

                But here’s a thought. Isn’t this Torso Man largely a modern concept? Outside a small number of internal documents—Macnaghten and Hebbert—that noted similarities in three or four ‘torso’ cases, was there any real widespread conviction among the police or the public that there was such a person? It’s not like it was being flaunted in the press the way the Ripper was.

                So, to me, the idea that someone wanted to ‘prove’ a link between the two series puts the cart before the horse. Wouldn’t the killer be more concerned with first showing that the torso cases were linked to begin with? It’s all rather muddled.
                You should ask the killer which priorities he had, before surmising that he would have begun by making sure that the torso deeds were linked. That is putting the cart before the horse, is it not?

                Besides, the problem you are experiencing was likely not there; I seem to remember reading on more than one occasion how the police dispelled the idea that the Torso murders were the Rippers work by stating that they were more likely to be the work of the man responsible for the Rainham/Whitehall/ Jackson deeds. Which in itself would perhaps be enough to make our single killer - for a single killer it was - tick.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by caz View Post

                  Indeed RJ, which brings me again to Colin Ireland, known as 'The Gay Slayer'. His frustration was with the failure of the police to recognise that any of his victims were linked to a serial predator. They were treating the deaths as independent cases of 'sex games gone wrong', or murder by an abusive partner.

                  How clear could Lechmere have made his message linking two series, if the torsos were not even clearly linked to each other?

                  Love,

                  Caz
                  X
                  The Ripper deeds, even the canonical ones, are not clearly linked to each other, as per some posters out here. That does not mean that they were not regarded as such by those who investigated the deeds. There will have been a reason for why Hebbert examined the four bodies. He did not pick them at random, I´d say.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by caz View Post
                    Reminds me of the milkman who was accused of putting his arm round the woman at number 22 three times.

                    He was acquitted on the grounds that no man has arms that long.
                    And he drove the fastest Pickford's cart in the east...

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post

                      ‘…as far as we know [she] was entirely faithful to them.’ We don’t know anything much at all about her life, so that’s a meaningless statement.
                      This coming from the guy who claims Maria was a strong-minded woman who taught her son to hate prostitutes? Based on what??

                      You seem willing to imagine the worst about her, but certainly don’t seem to like it if someone suggests she may have been a perfectly normal and decent woman.

                      She married Cross and stayed with him until his death. I consider that evidence that she loved him. What is your evidence that she didn’t?

                      Meanwhile, the tragedy of slums isn’t that bad people live there, but that so many decent people live there. The fifteen percent or less that are committing all the crimes destroy the reputation of everyone else.

                      There are obvious reasons and advantages pointing to why a police constable would chose to live in the district he serves. Just as there are obvious reasons why a priest would. It doesn’t mean they are among the criminals!

                      What’s wrong with the idea of Maria and Thomas Cross being decent people, bringing a small measure of light into this dark district?

                      The son they raised certainly seems to have turned out perfectly normal.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Dickere View Post

                        And he drove the fastest Pickford's cart in the east...
                        The Thames is tidal as far as Teddington, so Two-Ton Ted has to be in the frame.

                        ‘You (couldn’t) hear the hoofbeats pound,
                        As the torso hit the ground…’



                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

                          This coming from the guy who claims Maria was a strong-minded woman who taught her son to hate prostitutes? Based on what??

                          You seem willing to imagine the worst about her, but certainly don’t seem to like it if someone suggests she may have been a perfectly normal and decent woman.

                          She married Cross and stayed with him until his death. I consider that evidence that she loved him. What is your evidence that she didn’t?

                          Meanwhile, the tragedy of slums isn’t that bad people live there, but that so many decent people live there. The fifteen percent or less that are committing all the crimes destroy the reputation of everyone else.

                          There are obvious reasons and advantages pointing to why a police constable would chose to live in the district he serves. Just as there are obvious reasons why a priest would. It doesn’t mean they are among the criminals!

                          What’s wrong with the idea of Maria and Thomas Cross being decent people, bringing a small measure of light into this dark district?

                          The son they raised certainly seems to have turned out perfectly normal.


                          Based on the facts, RJ. I don’t recall every saying she taught her son to hate prostitutes - that’s your twisting of what I said.

                          Maria came from a very respectable background and found herself living in a notorious red light district full of vicious prostitutes and pimps. The contrast between the country estate where she grew up and Tiger Bay couldn’t have been more extreme. Her much younger husband probably came into contact with these people on a daily basis.

                          Do you really imagine Maria wouldn’t have warned her children about the dangers lurking outside their front door? Would you? I know I would.

                          Comment


                          • This is Whitfield, the country house of Edward Bolton Clive. The Clives were one of the most prominent families in Herefordshire. Maria’s father, Thomas Roulson, was EBC’s butler and she was born and brought up in a lodge on the estate. When EBC died he left Thomas Roulson a generous legacy, which within a few years, it seems, came to Maria and her sisters in the form of a regular income.


                            Click image for larger version  Name:	75C4B301-2A17-4C3B-86AE-1C446FCEA1C5.jpeg Views:	0 Size:	19.1 KB ID:	767780

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                              The really odd thing in the Pinchin Street case is the long abdominal cut that was not carried through. It would not take longer to cut deeper, would it? This is what makes me think that this cut may have had a different purpose than the other abdominal cuts in these series.
                              The simplest explanation is that while cutting the victim's chemise, the killed sliced through "the external coat of the abdomen". the ripper would have cut much deeper than that.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                                Jackson had her uterus carved out by her killer.
                                Not according to Thomas Bond, who examined the pieces of Jackson's corpse.

                                "The flaps of skin and subcutaneous tissue consisted of two long, irregular slips taken from the abdominal walls. The left piece included the umbilicus, the greater part of the mons veneris the left labium majus, and labium minus. The right piece included the rest of the mons veneris, the right labium majus and minus, and part of the skin of the right buttock. These flaps accurately fitted together in the mid-line, and laterally corresponded to the incisions in the lower pieces of the trunk. The skin was fair, and the mons veneris was covered with light sandy hair. The upper part of the vagina was attached to the uterus; both ovaries and broad ligaments were present, and the posterior wall of the bladder. The uterus had been opened on the left side by a vertical cut, six inches long, through the left wall. The organ was much dilated the vessels on the inner surface large and open and the mucus membrane swollen and softened. The uterus measured 10in. long by 7.5 in. wide. The circumference of the os externum was 4in…"



                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X