Lipski

[Dane_F]

And yet we have Jane Beadmore's killer in Sept 1888, John Gill's murderer in Dec 1888, and William Bury in 1889, all of whom indulged in some degree of mutilation or dismemberment, one of them even lived in the East End during the autumn of terror. Correlation does not imply causation.

Not mutilation. Vaginal mutilation. Very specifically vaginal mutilation.

[Robert St Devil]

hello abby

sure this is off topic from whatever this threads been about in recent days but saw your post. for now, i can only say it would be convenient to tie the torso killer to the ripper, but woo boy! would it ever make one helluva story. still the arguments are good for both sides but i lean towards ,yes,.

we dont rightly know what state of mind the ripper was in. reading through the disorganization/organization, it seems the common concept is to keep him static, robotic with, the exception being, fisherman,s assertion that the killer could move between both identities. it made me wonder how... and a quick resolution could be that the ripper was his drunken persona. maybe the torso killer goes out on these holidays, gets blitzed on pots of ale or smokes some cheeba or what-have-you, and what results is a lusty murderer whose methodical nature is broken from for the moment, albeit maintaining some semblance of his craft; and, finishing the night off with a cup of coffee to bring him round. Speculation, true, but consideration that his ambitions may not have occurred A-B-C style.

[Abby Normal]

If you are looking for a possible relationship between the Torso murders and JtR then a hypothesis I would look to work with is that JtR was harvesting sexual body parts freshly to replace those parts on the torsos he was using to act out his fantasy.

Body parts were dumped in a relative of Mary Shelly's garden for example.

Which would be behavior more in the direction of Ed Gein. Therefore the canonical five are merely quick fixes for his real home projects.

Who knows though? JtR was obviously a disturbed individual.

Interesting batman
I've often wondered if they were the same man if he was collecting parts to create a "Frankenstein monster". At the very least I think he liked to collect female body parts both internal and external.

[Abby Normal]

sure this is off topic from whatever this threads been about in recent days but saw your post. for now, i can only say it would be convenient to tie the torso killer to the ripper, but woo boy! would it ever make one helluva story. still the arguments are good for both sides but i lean towards ,yes,.

we dont rightly know what state of mind the ripper was in. reading through the disorganization/organization, it seems the common concept is to keep him static, robotic with, the exception being, fisherman,s assertion that the killer could move between both identities. it made me wonder how... and a quick resolution could be that the ripper was his drunken persona. maybe the torso killer goes out on these holidays, gets blitzed on pots of ale or smokes some cheeba or what-have-you, and what results is a lusty murderer whose methodical nature is broken from for the moment, albeit maintaining some semblance of his craft; and, finishing the night off with a cup of coffee to bring him round. Speculation, true, but consideration that his ambitions may not have occurred A-B-C style.

Hi devil
Another interesting observation quickly following on from Batmans!
IMHO that's entirely plausible scenario and or the ripper murders happened when he couldn't bring them to his home and the torso murders are when he could.

[Abby Normal]

Well said Abby. Just to tack on one point that I see people gloss over but is one of the strongest for me personally in tying the torsos to the Ripper Murders:

To say that the Ripper and the Torso Killer are two different people is to inturn infer that there were two serial killers operating in roughly the same area, at roughly the same time who both practiced vaginal mutilations. When I weigh the odds of which would be rarer, I have to imagine the odds become near infinitesimal that it were two separate individuals partaking in such behavior around the same time, around the same area.

Even if we expanded the radius to include all of London or even all of England the number of killers who partake in vaginal mutilations is so minuscule that two being active at the same time would be absolutely unheard of. Once you include the years active and the general location it pushes the odds to nearly impossible.

Atleast, that is my opinion.

Hi Dane
Thanks.
Yes before I ever seriously considered that torso man and the ripper could be the same that very question nagged at the back of my mind. When I learned from Debra that ALL the torso victims had post mortem mutilation and removal of internal body parts and that the victims more than likely were unfortunates then I started to seriously consider it. With subsequent research and input from debs and fish I now lean toward they were the same man.

If they had totally different methods, or it was different victimology or vastly different time periods or locations I would dismiss as coincidence, but to think as you say that there was two serial killers operating under these similarities, and at such an early time in serial killer history, it's more than likely in my opinion the same man.

[Joshua Rogan]

Yes before I ever seriously considered that torso man and the ripper could be the same that very question nagged at the back of my mind. When I learned from Debra that ALL the torso victims had post mortem mutilation and removal of internal body parts and that the victims more than likely were unfortunates then I started to seriously consider it. With subsequent research and input from debs and fish I now lean toward they were the same man.

If they had totally different methods, or it was different victimology or vastly different time periods or locations I would dismiss as coincidence, but to think as you say that there was two serial killers operating under these similarities, and at such an early time in serial killer history, it's more than likely in my opinion the same man.

Of the four '87-'89 torso cases, three had the abdomen opened up from ribs to crotch. However, as far as I'm aware only Liz Jackson definitely had any internal organs removed. The other three torsos did not have any organs missing from the parts recovered.

The only body parts missing in all the torso cases were the heads.

[Fisherman]

Of the four '87-'89 torso cases, three had the abdomen opened up from ribs to crotch. However, as far as I'm aware only Liz Jackson definitely had any internal organs removed. The other three torsos did not have any organs missing from the parts recovered.

The only body parts missing in all the torso cases were the heads.

The lungs, heart and thoracic viscera were absent in the Rainham case, as was the large intestine. The same applied to Jackson, who also lost her uterus.
There was also a uterus that had gone missing from the Whitehall torso.

Whether these parts were "removed" as such, they were certainly missing.

It bears interest that the parts missing in the Rainham case are similar to those missing in the Jackson case, adding that Jackson also lost her uterus.

[Fisherman]

Harry D: But according to you he was arrogant enough to tough it out on the streets. Why the need for a bolthole in the first place?

Because that was how he started out, when feeling less convinced that he could never get caught, perhaps. That may have played an initial role.
There is also another matter, that I cannot go into in detail. But basically, what he did would sometimes need tools that he could not take into the street, and some of the work he did was taken to a level of precision that he could not reach in a dark street.
The dark streets, though, were good enough for other elements on his agenda.
This is all presuming that I am correct when it comes to his object of inspiration, of course.

Can you name one serial killer who dismembered one series of victims in private whilst mutilating others on the street, in a matter of weeks?

I can name a number of killers who did things no other killer has done, Harry. We do not need another eyeball killer to prove that Charles albright existed, do we?

And yet he deliberately left the torsos to be found, not the heads.

And not the legs of the Pinchins Street torso. And not the upper thorax of the Rainham torso.
Parts were lost. Much of the torso parts were thrown into the water. The same may have happened to the heads. At any rate, he left other indicators and clues to the identities.

I don't know where the Torso did his killing but his dump sites stretched across London, whereas the Ripper never ventured outside the comfort of Whitechapel or its outskirts despite other corners of London crawling with prostitutes. Why was the Pinchin Torso the only Torso victim that overlapped with the Ripper's territory?

So I am correct, then - you do not know where the Torso man killed. The fact that he dumped body parts all over town was something the Ripper could not copy unless he threw the corpses of his victims over his shoulder and walked away with them, Harry. So you have no point.

Not in the case of Kelly, the only victim killed on similar grounds to the Torso series and he made a right meal of it.

She had her kidneys extracted from the front, just like Eddowes. And it was called skill in that case, so why not here? He also scored her face to mince-meat without damaging the eyes, so this was a man who could be very careful with the knife. And still, he cut off the eyelids, if memory serves me. Donīt underestimate him, Harry.

And you have no idea that the Torso murders spanned that long, either.

Yes, I do have such an idea, and I have the forensic evidence to go with it.

For argument's sake, if the murders did span that long, and given the cooling off periods between each murder, that would suggest an organized killer with a degree of self-control, in contrast to the Ripper who struck with alarming regularity over a short period of time in high-risk locations.

We donīt know when and how the Ripper struck. We speculate that he did so between August and November, but he may have killed other victims too, like MacKenzie. Both men peak around late 1888-1889, seemingly, something that should not be overlooked.

[Fisherman]

If you are looking for a possible relationship between the Torso murders and JtR then a hypothesis I would look to work with is that JtR was harvesting sexual body parts freshly to replace those parts on the torsos he was using to act out his fantasy.

Body parts were dumped in a relative of Mary Shelly's garden for example.

Which would be behavior more in the direction of Ed Gein. Therefore the canonical five are merely quick fixes for his real home projects.

Who knows though? JtR was obviously a disturbed individual.

I identify two problems here - to begin with, we know that in some cases (like the 1873 case, where the frst parts had been dumped hours only after death, the Jackson case and the Pinchin Street case), the killer did not hang on to the torsos for more tha the fewest of days. There is every reason to surmise that this was the general rule, although some torsos (like the Whitehall torso) were not found until late.
Following on, if the killer took out all of Kellys parts to use as spare material, then why did he leave the organs with the body?

[Fisherman]

sure this is off topic from whatever this threads been about in recent days but saw your post. for now, i can only say it would be convenient to tie the torso killer to the ripper, but woo boy! would it ever make one helluva story. still the arguments are good for both sides but i lean towards ,yes,.

we dont rightly know what state of mind the ripper was in. reading through the disorganization/organization, it seems the common concept is to keep him static, robotic with, the exception being, fisherman,s assertion that the killer could move between both identities. it made me wonder how... and a quick resolution could be that the ripper was his drunken persona. maybe the torso killer goes out on these holidays, gets blitzed on pots of ale or smokes some cheeba or what-have-you, and what results is a lusty murderer whose methodical nature is broken from for the moment, albeit maintaining some semblance of his craft; and, finishing the night off with a cup of coffee to bring him round. Speculation, true, but consideration that his ambitions may not have occurred A-B-C style.

Just for the record, I am not saying that the Ripper moved between organized and disorganized. I think he did basically the same thing to all his victims, but go more and more brazen as he managed to stay uncaught. This would not per se make him disorgnized at times - it would only make him an organized killer who embraced taking risks.

My own suggestion is that he was sober enough in both roles, as the Ripper and as the Torso man, and that this helped him to stay uncaught. And with sober enough, I do not necessarily mean stone cold sober.

[Batman]

I identify two problems here - to begin with, we know that in some cases (like the 1873 case, where the frst parts had been dumped hours only after death, the Jackson case and the Pinchin Street case), the killer did not hang on to the torsos for more tha the fewest of days. There is every reason to surmise that this was the general rule, although some torsos (like the Whitehall torso) were not found until late.
Following on, if the killer took out all of Kellys parts to use as spare material, then why did he leave the organs with the body?

They may have just utilized what they wanted from a body. So in some cases they didn't want the torso but other parts. Head. Arms. Legs. Dump the torso. These would have been planned. Sex organs can be confiscated from any unfortunate unplanned.

Ed Gein did weird stuff similar, so I don't think its an unprecedented idea. Also Frankenstein is somewhat connected with the parts discovery in the 'Shelly' home.

I came up with this hypothesis last year or the year before on here and haven't seen or read it anywhere else. It is complex because it means the whitechapel murders of JtR are but a subset of much a bigger picture.

Another thing to remember is that throughout ancient history the Thames has had its fair share of torsos which continues right up until this day. Not all the torso murders may have been done by the same person.

However if JtR research hasn't made much progress, a better look at the evidence around the torso murders, may.

[Fisherman]

Batman: They may have just utilized what they wanted from a body. So in some cases they didn't want the torso but other parts. Head. Arms. Legs. Dump the torso. These would have been planned. Sex organs can be confiscated from any unfortunate unplanned.

Ed Gein did weird stuff similar, so I don't think its an unprecedented idea. Also Frankenstein is somewhat connected with the parts discovery in the 'Shelly' home.

I can see the logic, but it just does not work all that well for me. I find the extensive cutting on Mary Kelly, with a lot of time spent to achieve it, a lot of wasted time in the perspective. If he needed a heart (and we seem never to be able to agree that the heart was taken out here...), then why not hit her over the head, open the thorax, grab it and be gone?

For what reason did he spend lots and lots of time and effort on Kelly, if it was all about procuring a heart and nothing else...?

Much as it is an intriguing thought, I donīt think it fits the facts. Have alook at the 1873 torso victim - she had her face and scalp cut away in the shape of a ghastly mask. Why? So he could take another face/scalp from another victim and replace it? And why did he saw off the thighs at the hips and the arms at the shoulders, while he disarticulated the rest of the joints? What was that about? How does that fit?


I came up with this hypothesis last year or the year before on here and haven't seen or read it anywhere else. It is complex because it means the whitechapel murders of JtR are but a subset of much a bigger picture.

Another thing to remember is that throughout ancient history the Thames has had its fair share of torsos which continues right up until this day. Not all the torso murders may have been done by the same person.

However if JtR research hasn't made much progress, a better look at the evidence around the torso murders, may.

Absolutely. It is the best way forward, the way I look upon it.

[Batman]

I think the point of the hypothesis is that he is maintaining a corpse by replacing parts as they become more necrotic. That sexual organs are obtained by slash and grab as per the JtR murders for replacement and the other body parts chosen with calculation.

The question you are asking is why the overkill? Why not just take the parts. Well it seems to me that he seems to be just taking parts up until the mutilation of Eddowes face and then Kelly's entire being. So I just see it as an escalation in his hatred of the women he was harvesting from.

[Fisherman]

I think the point of the hypothesis is that he is maintaining a corpse by replacing parts as they become more necrotic. That sexual organs are obtained by slash and grab as per the JtR murders for replacement and the other body parts chosen with calculation.

The question you are asking is why the overkill? Why not just take the parts. Well it seems to me that he seems to be just taking parts up until the mutilation of Eddowes face and then Kelly's entire being. So I just see it as an escalation in his hatred of the women he was harvesting from.

Okay. But why not just hack Kelly into little pieces? Why take out the organs and neatly place them around her in the bed, using some of them for a makeshift pillow? That does not seem like hatred to me.
The same goes for the part of colon he took out of Eddowes.
And if he needed one new kidney, then surely he needed two? They would have decomposed simultaneously.

[Abby Normal]

Harry D: But according to you he was arrogant enough to tough it out on the streets. Why the need for a bolthole in the first place?

Because that was how he started out, when feeling less convinced that he could never get caught, perhaps. That may have played an initial role.
There is also another matter, that I cannot go into in detail. But basically, what he did would sometimes need tools that he could not take into the street, and some of the work he did was taken to a level of precision that he could not reach in a dark street.
The dark streets, though, were good enough for other elements on his agenda.
This is all presuming that I am correct when it comes to his object of inspiration, of course.

Can you name one serial killer who dismembered one series of victims in private whilst mutilating others on the street, in a matter of weeks?

I can name a number of killers who did things no other killer has done, Harry. We do not need another eyeball killer to prove that Charles albright existed, do we?

And yet he deliberately left the torsos to be found, not the heads.

And not the legs of the Pinchins Street torso. And not the upper thorax of the Rainham torso.
Parts were lost. Much of the torso parts were thrown into the water. The same may have happened to the heads. At any rate, he left other indicators and clues to the identities.

I don't know where the Torso did his killing but his dump sites stretched across London, whereas the Ripper never ventured outside the comfort of Whitechapel or its outskirts despite other corners of London crawling with prostitutes. Why was the Pinchin Torso the only Torso victim that overlapped with the Ripper's territory?

So I am correct, then - you do not know where the Torso man killed. The fact that he dumped body parts all over town was something the Ripper could not copy unless he threw the corpses of his victims over his shoulder and walked away with them, Harry. So you have no point.

Not in the case of Kelly, the only victim killed on similar grounds to the Torso series and he made a right meal of it.

She had her kidneys extracted from the front, just like Eddowes. And it was called skill in that case, so why not here? He also scored her face to mince-meat without damaging the eyes, so this was a man who could be very careful with the knife. And still, he cut off the eyelids, if memory serves me. Donīt underestimate him, Harry.

And you have no idea that the Torso murders spanned that long, either.

Yes, I do have such an idea, and I have the forensic evidence to go with it.

For argument's sake, if the murders did span that long, and given the cooling off periods between each murder, that would suggest an organized killer with a degree of self-control, in contrast to the Ripper who struck with alarming regularity over a short period of time in high-risk locations.

We donīt know when and how the Ripper struck. We speculate that he did so between August and November, but he may have killed other victims too, like MacKenzie. Both men peak around late 1888-1889, seemingly, something that should not be overlooked.

Hi Fish
exactly-and I think its a point that does get overlooked. Both series ended around the same time late summer early fall 89. Great point.