How Many Victims Were There?

[Fisherman]

As I pointed out, there are indications within the physical and circumstantial evidence in the cases of Polly and Annie that the killer sought to mutilate their abdomens after he cuts their throats. Ergo, their death was not the core objective, the PM mutilations were.

That is exactly my view too, although I would warn very much against thinking that eviscerations was the sole and ultimate goal. As I say, it was probably about cutting in a more general sense.

In the case of the Torsos, contrary to what you accused me of, I just pointed out that their are no such indications.

Eh - Jackson had her uterus plucked out together with her heart and lungs. If that is not an example of an intention to mutilate and eviscerate, then I don't know what is.

Nor are there in Liz Strides murder. Or Marys murder. Or Marthas. Or Emmas. Yet you want everyone to buy into your belief that the geographical and historical similarities override all the basic differences.

In the Stride case, the contemporary police and most students of the case today believe that the killer would have eviscerated and mutilated her if he had not been disturbed. And the semantics sources (intelligibly) reason that this was why he went after Eddowes on the same night. Kelly was mutilated, extensively so, and eviscerated, so I cannot see your point there. Tabram, the implements may have been wrong, simple as that. But she DID sustain a cut to her vulva, something that looks like mutilation. to me. Smith, I don't think she was a Ripper victim in the first place.

[Fisherman]

The ONLY victims that we know were soliciting at the time they met their killer are C1 and C2, any other inclusions are speculative and harmful to the search for the truth. Like lumping murders together that obviously do not match in very significant ways.

They all had a record of prostitution, so the suggestion that they were prostituting themselves on the nights of their murders is and remains a very good one.

[Herlock Sholmes]

No, Herlock, they would not. They would instead work from the assumption of a single killer who sometimes dismembered, the way a number of serial killers has done over the years.

Its a flagrant lie to claim that the murders are dissimilar "in every way". They are nothing of the sort, but you like to inflame, methinks?

And the screwdriver example proves a whole deal, I'm afraid - albeit what it proves is not to your taste.

You are of course correct Fish. It was an exaggeration for me to have said in every way. I should have said the in most ways.

[Herlock Sholmes]

If I may make a remark here, Abby, I think that we should ban the word "superficial". It implies that we know the full story, and that the differences only SEEM to be real differences whereas they are not.

the reason that I want a ban here is not really your using the word - it is instead the fact that Gareth has used it on numerous occasions, applying it to the similarities that he says are superficial only.

That would mean that we can take it as a fact that once we look deeper into the similarities, we will find that they are not REAL similarities, they only SEEM to be. Of course, Gareth cannot possibly know this, nor can anybody else do so. We do not have the answers. But the sheer amount of very rare similarities speaks a clear and unequivocal language.

Anyway, that's why I want the word stricken of the to do-list.

Otherwise, I agree with you, and I suspect in the not very far away future we will ALL agree that there was just the one killer. It is an inevitable shift off paradigms, given the quality and wealth of the evidence for a common originator. Today, this will be vehemently denied by many, since old habits die hard. Tomorrow it will have changed a little bit and in days to come, logic will prevail. That is my conviction, and I will do my foremost to help the process along.

Do we have any way of being certain that the killer and the dismemberer were one and the same? If not then we should ban the phrase Torso Killer. All that we know is that these women died and that someone dismembered them. We cannot be certain that these two acts were committed by the same person.

[Michael W Richards]

In the Stride case, the contemporary police and most students of the case today believe that the killer would have eviscerated and mutilated her if he had not been disturbed. (No evidence at all to that effect.) And the semantics sources (intelligibly) reason that this was why he went after Eddowes on the same night. (Without any substantive connection between the 2 murders and 1 killer.) Kelly was mutilated, extensively so, and eviscerated, so I cannot see your point there. ( My point was Abdominally Focused PM Mutilations, which Ive repeated many times.) Tabram, the implements may have been wrong, simple as that.(a throat can be cut, and was often cut, using simple knives like pen knives) But she DID sustain a cut to her vulva,(likely the result of a stab), something that looks like mutilation. to me. Smith, I don't think she was a Ripper victim in the first place.

Lets stick with what the evidence says, like in Liz's case. It says she was murdered. That's it.

[Fisherman]

Lets stick with what the evidence says, like in Liz's case. It says she was murdered. That's it.

The evidence also discloses that she was arrested for soliciting sex while still staying in Sweden. And that she had her neck deeply cut in St Georges.

[Sam Flynn]

Do we have any way of being certain that the killer and the dismemberer were one and the same? If not then we should ban the phrase Torso Killer. All that we know is that these women died and that someone dismembered them. We cannot be certain that these two acts were committed by the same person.

...or that the same person (or two) was involved in all the cases. I'm pretty sure that Pinchin Street, at least, was not the work of the same person(s) responsible for the West End torsos.

[Michael W Richards]

The evidence also discloses that she was arrested for soliciting sex while still staying in Sweden. And that she had her neck deeply cut in St Georges.

She petitioned to have herself removed from the active streetwalkers list kept by the authorities in Goteborg, successfully. A rare feat...and one that could only be accomplished with proof of legitimate work offers. And she had lots of legitimate jobs after that...so...her history has nothing to support your claims about what she might have been doing there that night. The single cut did not sever both major arteries in her throat, both of the priors had 2 throat cuts down to their spines, and they cut all major throat vessels.

[Fisherman]

...or that the same person (or two) was involved in all the cases. I'm pretty sure that Pinchin Street, at least, was not the work of the same person(s) responsible for the West End torsos.

Making you a better and more accomplished judge of the matter than Hebbert, who examined the wounds and cuts and who never for a second hesitated to say that they were the work of the same man in all four 1887-1889 cases.

And which point is it you make to clinch your case? That the victim had not had her arms taken off!

PS. Interestingly, Phillips (the old numbnut) also stated that there were great similarities between the cuts to Kellys neck and those to the neck of the Pinchin Street victim. It may well be that both medicos are a fair cut above you.

[Michael W Richards]

...or that the same person (or two) was involved in all the cases. I'm pretty sure that Pinchin Street, at least, was not the work of the same person(s) responsible for the West End torsos.

Don't suggest yet another serial killer Sam, youll fluster a bunch of narrowminded folks here.

[Fisherman]

She petitioned to have herself removed from the active streetwalkers list kept by the authorities in Goteborg, successfully. A rare feat...and one that could only be accomplished with proof of legitimate work offers. And she had lots of legitimate jobs after that...so...her history has nothing to support your claims about what she might have been doing there that night.

Actually, her history involves having prostituted herself in Sweden, Michael, and there was little doubt within the police that she was an unfortunate in London too. I find that a lot of useful support.

The single cut did not sever both major arteries in her throat, both of the priors had 2 throat cuts down to their spines, and they cut all major throat vessels.

And Eddowes did not have all vessels cut either. Plus, of course, it is not the number of vessels cut that primarily give away a common killer, it is the deep and lethal throat-cutting per se.

[Abby Normal]

If I may make a remark here, Abby, I think that we should ban the word "superficial". It implies that we know the full story, and that the differences only SEEM to be real differences whereas they are not.

the reason that I want a ban here is not really your using the word - it is instead the fact that Gareth has used it on numerous occasions, applying it to the similarities that he says are superficial only.

That would mean that we can take it as a fact that once we look deeper into the similarities, we will find that they are not REAL similarities, they only SEEM to be. Of course, Gareth cannot possibly know this, nor can anybody else do so. We do not have the answers. But the sheer amount of very rare similarities speaks a clear and unequivocal language.

Anyway, that's why I want the word stricken of the to do-list.

Otherwise, I agree with you, and I suspect in the not very far away future we will ALL agree that there was just the one killer. It is an inevitable shift off paradigms, given the quality and wealth of the evidence for a common originator. Today, this will be vehemently denied by many, since old habits die hard. Tomorrow it will have changed a little bit and in days to come, logic will prevail. That is my conviction, and I will do my foremost to help the process along.

lol. Its why I said superficial differences-to try and pre empt Sam for using it to say superficial similarities like he does all the time.
it can be used either way. and IMHO once all the facts are known and the extreme rarity of the similarities, the overwhelming similarities in general and that the minor differences could be ascribed to different circs (like the killer not having a bolt hole accessable and increasing thrill and desire to kill "in public) then to me, the differences are (or could be) superficial.

but yes I take your point.

[Abby Normal]

The ONLY victims that we know were soliciting at the time they met their killer are C1 and C2, any other inclusions are speculative and harmful to the search for the truth. Like lumping murders together that obviously do not match in very significant ways.

actually we don't KNOW if ANY of the ripper victims were actively soliciting, and I think that Kelly and stride were probably not, although the rest probably were.
That being said they were all prostitutes, recently, and or at some time or another so unfortunately that is an accurate description.

re the torsos-The only one that was IDed was Jackson, and she was an unfortunate also, so its not that much of a stretch to assume the others were, or were at some point, and ran with that type of crowd, which would bring them into the wheelhouse of a local serial killer. Furthermore, why do you think the other torso victims WERENT Ided? I would surmise that its because they were unfortunates, with a transient lifestyle and no one cared enough about them to notice them missing or take the time to come forward, sadly.

[Abby Normal]

Do we have any way of being certain that the killer and the dismemberer were one and the same? If not then we should ban the phrase Torso Killer. All that we know is that these women died and that someone dismembered them. We cannot be certain that these two acts were committed by the same person.

cmon HS, your delving into trevor nonsense now. The police and medicos at the time thought they were killed, and by the same person. even the inquests mostly came back with verdicts of murder.

not knowing cause of death dosnt preclude it being obvious murder.

this sticks in my craw-part of the reason that skank child killer casey Anthony got acquitted. the dumb ass Florida jury got confused by the "Official" unknown cause of death. Like the duct tape around her mouth and dumped body inside a trash bag wasn't enough to show obvious murder.

[Michael W Richards]

And Eddowes did not have all vessels cut either. Plus, of course, it is not the number of vessels cut that primarily give away a common killer, it is the deep and lethal throat-cutting per se.

Eddowes...DOUBLE throat cut. The third canonical with that attribute.