Originally posted by Michael W Richards
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Lipski
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Harry D View PostWould you like some chips with all that salt?
Do you think you can manage such a simple thing? It would be awfully nice if you did, but I have my doubts; you have failed twice so far.
If you cannot manage to stop lying about it, then maybe you can explain to the rest of out here exactly WHY you lie about it?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Abby Normal View PostPerhaps. But we just don't know for sure. it seems Torso man got around-parts were dumped all over. He didn't just confine himself to that vicinity and that's the main point I'm trying to make. He left his mark all over town -including the East End.
Originally posted by Abby Normal View PostSo in the scenario of the Torso man and the ripper being the same man, I suggest that he lived in close proximity to the ripper murders. Murders where he had no access to his bolt hole during those times, yet the urge was so great he still needed to do it and resorted to killing on the street. and or was "upping" the thrill by killing and mutilating in public.
Originally posted by Abby Normal View Postyes but it had post mortem mutilation to the abdomen as did all the torsos.
Not even all the ripper victims had organs removed. so again, the killers of both series are all over the place
Originally posted by Abby Normal View Postbut common denominator all had severe over kill post mortem mutilation to the mid section. and that in my mind potentially ties them all together as the same man.
Comment
-
Hi Harry
Unless the killer had multiple boltholes, Jackson's murder would tend to place his dwelling further west than east.
And I find it incongruous that a killer who took precautions to kill his victims in private, dismember their bodies, destroy their identities, and use dump sites across London, would be the same guy who attacked random women in high-risk locations that were not under his control.
With Nichols, the killer's signature was perhaps still evolving, or he was interrupted. Same deal with Stride. That's the risk you take when attacking women in public places. The Torso Killer didn't have that problem with the Pinchin St. victim, but for some reason he didn't procure any internal organs or butcher the body. The Torso killer was used to being alone with his victims, the Ripper wasn't - as evinced when he went to town on Mary Kelly. The escalation theory goes out the window when you throw the Torso series into the mix.
And I've provided examples of contemporaneous cases that also involved overkill/mutilation/dismemberment that weren't committed by the Torso Murderer.
It's not enough to take such a broad definition and use it to conflate two contradictory series of murders.
look at it this way. a man murders mary Kelly- post mortem splits her open down the abdomen, removing her walls in large flaps of skin to get at her insides.
six months later another unfortunate is murdered has her abdomen split open post mortem removing large flaps of skin. and its a different man?
can you really imagine two men, two different serial killers doing this? Operating in the same area?
Look Harry. I see what your saying. I see the points in the differences you are highlighting. I really do. But the chances of two different men doing this major type of similar killing in the same general location, at the same time, targeting the same type of victim both series ending at the same time is too much for me to be mere coincidence."Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"
-Edgar Allan Poe
"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."
-Frederick G. Abberline
Comment
-
Originally posted by Abby Normal View PostAnd what praytell is the evidence that she was cut 15 minutes before Diemshitz arrived?
And I said that the time Louis says he arrived, not when he arrived.
But that does illuminate some issues if you know what the other witnesses said.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Michael W Richards View PostHas anyone actually read the case evidence? Blackwell estimated he arrived at 1:16 by his own watch, he stated at the Inquest that the woman had been cut 20 minute to 1/2 hour before his arrival....hence, 12:46-56. I said nearly 15 minutes.
And I said that the time Louis says he arrived, not when he arrived.
But that does illuminate some issues if you know what the other witnesses said.
Ok I'm lost. so if Blackwell says she was cut at approx. quarter till one and Louis says he arrived at one and Schwartz says she saw stride get attacked by BS at about quarter till one, dosnt blackwells evidence jibe with schwartz-IE that BS man was the one who cut her at about quarter till one?"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"
-Edgar Allan Poe
"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."
-Frederick G. Abberline
Comment
-
Originally posted by Michael W Richards View PostHas anyone actually read the case evidence? Blackwell estimated he arrived at 1:16 by his own watch, he stated at the Inquest that the woman had been cut 20 minute to 1/2 hour before his arrival....hence, 12:46-56. I said nearly 15 minutes.
And I said that the time Louis says he arrived, not when he arrived.
But that does illuminate some issues if you know what the other witnesses said.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View PostThe important thing about the Pinchin Street torso is that it was apparently carried manually to it´s dumping site. No cart was seen or heard, and no tracks found - but there were impressions of sack cloth on the skin of the torso.
So it seems it was carried to where it was dumped by the killer, meaning that it would not have come from afar.
My suggestion has always been that it came from 147 Cable Street.
Steve
Comment
-
Originally posted by Elamarna View PostHi Fish keeping out of this on the whole. One interesting point you make. Why 147 cable street?
Seriously, because that was the address of Lechmeres mother at the time of the Pinchin Street torso deed. And we know that two years on, she was listed as a horse flesh dealer with her own business.
Suggestion - if the business was already up and running in September 1889 and if she ran it from her home, then there is a fair chance that there were finetoothed saws and sharp knives available at the address. And the implication is that the torso was carried manually in a sack to the dumping place, so we should accept that the distance it was carried was not a very long one.
In December of 1889, Joseph Forsdike (Maria Louisas third and final husband) died from senility and bronchitis, so he will have suffered a period of illness before that. Therefore, it may be that he was treated in hospital during periods, and that the apartment may have been empty for some time. In which case Charles Lechmere may have used it.
So that´s why I favour 147 Cable Street as the place the Pinchin Street torso came from: because on the surface of things, once again Charles Lechmere has ties to a deed. It should be remembered that he himself lived in Pinchin Street as a child, and that Maria Louisa moved back there a couple of times, meaning that it will have been a street where he was well aquainted with the layout, including the railway arches.
Comment
-
The police report on the finding of the Pinchin St torso has this to say;
"The question of how conveyed is in the region of theory, for if conveyed by cart, then no limit can be fixed, but if by hand about 250 yards would be the limit"
147 Cable Street was probably something like 500 yards from the archway.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View PostThe police report on the finding of the Pinchin St torso has this to say;
"The question of how conveyed is in the region of theory, for if conveyed by cart, then no limit can be fixed, but if by hand about 250 yards would be the limit"
147 Cable Street was probably something like 500 yards from the archway.
The distance looks more like around 350 yards in my book, by the way.
PS. Checked with Google Maps. They made it 0,2 miles, meaning around 320 meters.Last edited by Fisherman; 03-24-2017, 03:58 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View PostWhat decided the limit, Joshua?
The distance looks more like around 350 yards in my book, by the way.
350 yards seems a very low estimate to me, but hey I've been wrong before. Do you have an exact location for no.147?
Google maps does say 0.2 miles, but then it says that for 106 Cable street too.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View PostI don't know, I just came across the reference and thought I'd share. Presumably the police thought anything more that 250 yards would be a very unlikely distance for someone to carry the remains of a body through the streets without exhausting themselves and/or attracting attention.
350 yards seems a very low estimate to me, but hey I've been wrong before. Do you have an exact location for no.147?
Google maps does say 0.2 miles, but then it says that for 106 Cable street too.
As for how far the killer would have managed to carry the torso, we are speaking of a smallish woman, around 5,3 ft, and not very bulky. Maybe the part weighed, say, 25 kilograms. Maybe 30. Regardless of which, a strong fellow could have carried it from Cable Street to Buckingham palace, methinks. Regarding the attention part, it is hard to say where the limit goes - presumably when you are spotted. But when is that...?
Comment
-
Comment
-
Originally posted by Fisherman View PostAs for how far the killer would have managed to carry the torso, we are speaking of a smallish woman, around 5,3 ft, and not very bulky. Maybe the part weighed, say, 25 kilograms. Maybe 30. Regardless of which, a strong fellow could have carried it from Cable Street to Buckingham palace, methinks. Regarding the attention part, it is hard to say where the limit goes - presumably when you are spotted. But when is that...?
Comment
Comment