Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lipski

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

  • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
    Ooh, found a map with 147 on, before it was demolished.

    http://britishlibrary.georeferencer....fLAM/visualize

    It is slightly closer than I thought, but whatever the exact distance, it's still outside the police search radius.

    Maybe that's why they never caught the killer?
    Now, thatīs an idea, of course - they had to draw the line somewhere, and may have been a tad too quick on the trigger.

    If it WAS Lechmere, then this could be his second lucky escape - the door to door would not have entailed Doveton Street...

    Thanks for the map, by the way!

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
      She was described variously as stout, and plump, and the arms were not removed, so I would personally go with your higher estimate. But agree, someone accustomed to heavy lifting could carry it a fair distance. Plus, of course, there's always the possibility that the torso man parked his transport somewhere nearby (but off PC Pennett's beat) and carried it only a short part of the way, once he saw the PC leave the area.
      Yes, thatīs true, of course. But if so, then the torso could have come from anywhere. My own feeling is that if somebody transported a body in a sack on a cart, that somebody would not be very likely to park that cart very far from the dumping site - but no cart was seen or heard close by the railway arch. Plus I would have thought that for the sack cloth to make an impression, the body would have been carried in it for some time.

      Guss what - itīs another uncertainty ...

      Comment


      • According to Dr Phillips' autopsy info, the weight was 67lb, or a tad over 30kg.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
          According to Dr Phillips' autopsy info, the weight was 67lb, or a tad over 30kg.
          Okay, so she was just about where we thought sheīd be. Then the police idea was not about the physical part, since many men could carry that weight for quite some distance. I used to carry my own kids for hours on end when they weighed 30 kilograms.
          Today - different matter. My eldest son is 197 centimeters and weighs in at about 110 kilograms...
          Last edited by Fisherman; 03-24-2017, 08:50 AM.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Harry D View Post
            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.
            Here's an idea, Harry. Something I was thinking about today, matter of fact.

            First, when Henry Wainwright and his brother Thomas cut up the body of Harriet Lane, they did so because she was buried under the floorboards of their "bolthole". Soon, they were to be evicted and knew they must discard the body or be found out.

            Similarly, the torso killer may have used a bolthole to kill in 1887 (Rainham) and August 1888 (Whitehall) and then had a situation where he was evicted or forced from the use of the private bolthole. With lodging cheap , and low on cash, he decides to move into a lodging house in the East end. His insatiable desire to kill is filled by murdering victims in the street yet he can't take the big trophies (arms, legs, heads) with him in the open environment. He can take smaller parts (uteri, kidneys,etc) and still feel like the psycho he really is. By June of 1889 he has secured a job and a private bolthole again and murders E. Jackson. Back in business.

            Also, a second scenario. Two killers working in collusion. Taking the focus off the other long enough to keep the police off guard. A few months ago I found a news report. I will transcribe it below.

            The Echo September 16, 1889

            While following up every clue, however slight, which comes in their way, the detectives are not relying upon the theory that the Pinchin street crime was the work of the Whitechapel monster alone. They place more reliance on the assumption that two men placed the burden under the arch, and that the criminals responsible for depositing the woman's trunk last year at the new police offices on the Thames Embankment have participated in the latest east end mystery.

            Comment


            • From the sickert thread

              Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
              Elamarna: Christer,

              Firstly thanks for explaining on the other thread, your reasoning for 147 Cable Street, which as I suspected is not based any palpable evidence, just your reasoning that if Lechmere were the killer it is an obvious place.
              Which is a fair conclusion once one takes that approach.

              It is a VERY obvious place. As for palpable evidence between Lechmere and the Pinchin Street torso, you may like how a bloodied rag was found in the building works of St Philips church near the London hospital - a building site that lay along the route from Pinchin Street to Doveton Street. The rag was found the day after the torso was discovered.

              So this is the second bloodied rag found at a spot along a route from a Ripper murder place/Torso dumping place to Doveton Street.

              Like I always say - Charles never had much luck with the coincidences.


              This Christer is where we really do part company.

              "A bloodied rag" found along a route he may have taken from his home to Pinchin street, there were, as you are aware more than one possible route, just look at the maps of the time.

              A bloodied Rag found a day later, no idea if human blood? No idea if dropped in the 24 hours before discovery? Any proof of provenance of any sort?

              At least in the case of the Goulston street, we are reasonably sure it was part of Eddowes apron



              This is not evidence which can be shown is related to the case, it is an interesting story but it is only that, and I fail to see how it can be viewed as "palpable evidence" to quote myself.


              Steve

              Comment


              • Hmmmm.....bloody rag found near hospital.....not exactly compelling evidence. Any more info on this, Fish?

                There was another bloody rag found closer in time and distance to the torso, so articles like that weren't unknown on the streets. Dr Phillips' assistant Percy Clarke says this in his statement;

                "When returning from the mortuary to Leman St police station with Insp. Pinhorn we were called by some men to a piece of waste ground in Hooper Street; we there found near an opening at the bottom of the pailings a bloodstained petticoat, body of common make, such as would be worn by a woman of stoutest build. The blood was not very recent & appeared to be menstrual; from the manner too in which it had been folded I should think it had probably been used as a diaper."

                Comment


                • Joshua Rogan: Hmmmm.....bloody rag found near hospital.....not exactly compelling evidence.

                  Well, of course, hospitals are in the habit of dumping their bloodied rags in nearby church constructions, so you have a point...

                  Any more info on this, Fish?

                  It was in Rob Clacks essay on the Pinchin Street torso in Ripperologist some time ago.

                  I find it interesting since it was found in a direct line between the Pinchin Street railway arch and Doveton Street.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Elamarna View Post
                    From the sickert thread





                    This Christer is where we really do part company.

                    "A bloodied rag" found along a route he may have taken from his home to Pinchin street, there were, as you are aware more than one possible route, just look at the maps of the time.

                    A bloodied Rag found a day later, no idea if human blood? No idea if dropped in the 24 hours before discovery? Any proof of provenance of any sort?

                    At least in the case of the Goulston street, we are reasonably sure it was part of Eddowes apron



                    This is not evidence which can be shown is related to the case, it is an interesting story but it is only that, and I fail to see how it can be viewed as "palpable evidence" to quote myself.


                    Steve
                    It is a straw in the wind - but an interesting straw. How palpable it is will be up to each and everyone to decide for themselves.

                    And in the Goulston Street business, we are not "reasonably sure" that the rag was part of Eddowes apron - we are certain of it. You need to dare to make that leap every now and then...
                    Last edited by Fisherman; 03-25-2017, 09:35 AM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

                      I find it interesting since it was found in a direct line between the Pinchin Street railway arch and Doveton Street.[/B]
                      That while of course true, is not the full picture.

                      The rag is found on one of many possible routes to Lechmere's home, and it has to be said this route via the church is not the most direct route he may have taken.

                      Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                      It is a straw in the wind - but an interesting straw. How palpable it is will be up to each and everyone to decide for themselves.
                      Agreed in the end its what individuals see and decide on, not our views.

                      However to me its just a bit of bloodied rag, with nothing to suggest it is connected to the Pinchin street case; its more like "grasping for straws" than "a straw in the wind".





                      Steve
                      Last edited by Elamarna; 03-25-2017, 10:27 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

                        And in the Goulston Street business, we are not "reasonably sure" that the rag was part of Eddowes apron - we are certain of it. You need to dare to make that leap every now and then...
                        Yes Christer you are right, not sure why I was not stronger there, given that I have argued for the actual type of apron, and what the bit of it was found in Goulston Street in the past.



                        Steve

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Elamarna View Post
                          That while of course true, is not the full picture.

                          The rag is found on one of many possible routes to Lechmere's home, and it has to be said this route via the church is not the most direct route he may have taken.


                          Agreed in the end its what individuals see and decide on, not our views.

                          However to me its just a bit of bloodied rag, with nothing to suggest it is connected to the Pinchin street case; its more like "grasping for straws" than "a straw in the wind".

                          Steve
                          It IS "just" a piece of bloodied rag, and it cannot be tied to the torso deed. But it does not hurt the Lechmere bid that a bloodied rag was found in a straight line between Pinchin Street and Doveton Street the day after the torso was found.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by jerryd View Post
                            Also, a second scenario. Two killers working in collusion. Taking the focus off the other long enough to keep the police off guard. A few months ago I found a news report. I will transcribe it below.
                            You might be onto something there, jerryd. I think the Ripper & Torso series were part of something bigger going on at that time.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                              Has 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.

                              Maybe I am misreading this but here is the inquest testimony from Blackwell:

                              "Mr. Frederick William Blackwell deposed: I reside at No. 100, Commercial-road, and am a physician and surgeon. On Sunday morning last, at ten minutes past one o'clock, I was called to Berner-street by a policeman. My assistant, Mr. Johnston, went back with the constable, and I followed immediately I was dressed. I consulted my watch on my arrival, and it was 1.16 a.m."

                              Now I don't know where Commercial Road is relative to the Stride murder site but he seems to be saying that he was able to get there within six minutes and that includes the time he took to get dressed. He seems to be indicating that he was in his bed clothes and needed to change. Does that time line seem at all possible?

                              c.d.

                              Comment


                              • I just read that he did say that he was sleeping at the time. So would he have been able to change his clothes and get there within six minutes?

                                c.d.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X