What Makes A Victim?

[The Rookie Detective]

While I have a lot of respect for both Abberline's role and his knowledge, I don't really buy any of that. The idea of someone wanting to emulate the Whitechapel killer just doesn't seem likely to me, but it's still possible, just not something I really put any stock into.

I certainly don't believe that the killer of the C5 reached some kind of crescendo with Kelly and was either fulfilled or went mad. That's not really how serial murderers operate from what we know. However, I don't think Abberline knew that. Whoever killed Kelly either died, was locked up, laid low/moved and/or continued killing. It's entirely possible that the killer stopped for a period before continuing, either in Whitechapel or beyond.




It's definitely possible that two killers could operate in the same or similar areas at one time, and I regard the potential Torso Killer as having operated near enough to Whitechapel for it to stand as a relevant point here.

I do have reservations regarding the whole Torso Killer story, though, and I don't necessarily subscribe to the idea that all of the torsos were the work of a serial murderer, anyway. But yeah, it's possible that the Whitechapel killer wasn't the only one, and as I mentioned earlier, if Chapman wasn't the Ripper then he's another multiple murderer in the area.

These things are still pretty rare, all the same.

An excellent post Mike and you make some great points.


I think the Torso killings have never really been definitively sorted out and for me there were multiple Torso killers.

I say this because there were far more murders than people really acknowledge, and for 1 man to be responsible for a 30 plus year killing campaign is quite some stretch.

There were torsos found in the 1870's and then encroached into the next century with the Lambeth torso.

In comparison the Ripper killings were like an autumn holiday breakaway in Whitechapel, before he moved off to somewhere else.


Some of the torso victims were boiled, some still had their heads included (but not attached) and of course...there were many children's torsos found all over London wrapped up in parcels.

It's unsettling to talk about, but there were several children who IMO should be included in the torso killer victim list.

The idea that the Ripper could also be the Torso killer is a mixed bag for me.
I have recently sided with them being the work of the same man, but I also believe there's an argument to suggest that the practical application involved with the Torso killings speaks of multiple people being involved; ergo; several people being involved with the practical distribution of various body parts possibly incorporating a prostitute and/or child trafficking network.


However, with the Ripper, It feels very much like the work of a lone wolf. It would seem odd for there to have been 2 men, or a couple, involved with the slaughter of MJK for example.


The biggest clue to promote the Ripper and torso killings being linked, falls in the Pinchin St killing.

The body and the entire murder in general had the feeling of a hybrid of both killers.

The placing and presentation of a torso left under a railway arch with its arms still attached and a Lipski chalk marking allegedly found on the wall of the arch, plus the geographical proximity to Berner St, plus the man Arnold/Leary/Cleary coming forward to tell of a torso being found BEFORE it was even placed there, all feels very much like a Ripper killing.

The torso killer concealed/buried/packaged/boiled his victims with no mutilation, but Pinchin St was different in many respects.

The child torso killings and the West Ham child murders for me are also linked.

The murder of Elizabeth Jackson is also a potential clue between the different series of murders. One thing is for sure; the man who dismembered Jackson did NOT intend for her to be identified. It was the one time when the killer got sloppy and made a mistake.

Lots to ponder


RD

[Mike J. G.]

"He believes from the evidence of his own eyesight that the Miller's Court atrocity was the last of the real series, the others having been imitations, and that in Miller's Court the murderer reached the culminating point of gratification of his morbid ideas" - 22 May 1892, Cassell's Saturday Journal interview with Inspector Abberline

While I have a lot of respect for both Abberline's role and his knowledge, I don't really buy any of that. The idea of someone wanting to emulate the Whitechapel killer just doesn't seem likely to me, but it's still possible, just not something I really put any stock into.

I certainly don't believe that the killer of the C5 reached some kind of crescendo with Kelly and was either fulfilled or went mad. That's not really how serial murderers operate from what we know. However, I don't think Abberline knew that. Whoever killed Kelly either died, was locked up, laid low/moved and/or continued killing. It's entirely possible that the killer stopped for a period before continuing, either in Whitechapel or beyond.

Multiple serial killers in the same area is unlikely, but not unknown. Herbert Mullin and Edmund Kemper operated in Santa Cruz California at the same time and it had a population 1/10 of that of London of 1888.

And the Torsoman and the Ripper weren't acting in the same area over the same period. The Ripper was active in a small area. The Torso Killer scattered body parts along twenty miles of the Thames. The Ripper was active for a few months. The Torso Killer was active for over a decade.

It's definitely possible that two killers could operate in the same or similar areas at one time, and I regard the potential Torso Killer as having operated near enough to Whitechapel for it to stand as a relevant point here.

I do have reservations regarding the whole Torso Killer story, though, and I don't necessarily subscribe to the idea that all of the torsos were the work of a serial murderer, anyway. But yeah, it's possible that the Whitechapel killer wasn't the only one, and as I mentioned earlier, if Chapman wasn't the Ripper then he's another multiple murderer in the area.

These things are still pretty rare, all the same.

[Fiver]

I don't know that I'd put too much stock into a copycat killer, as they're incredibly rare, but who knows.

"He believes from the evidence of his own eyesight that the Miller's Court atrocity was the last of the real series, the others having been imitations, and that in Miller's Court the murderer reached the culminating point of gratification of his morbid ideas" - 22 May 1892, Cassell's Saturday Journal interview with Inspector Abberline

As for the so-called "Torso Killer," I wonder just how likely it is to have two serial murderers operating in the same vicinity during the same period, but it can obviously happen. We do have George Chapman in Whitechapel who was a multiple murderer of women, and if he wasn't Jack then that makes two killers around the same period, potentially three if there was an actual Torso Killer.

As always, who knows!

Multiple serial killers in the same area is unlikely, but not unknown. Herbert Mullin and Edmund Kemper operated in Santa Cruz California at the same time and it had a population 1/10 of that of London of 1888.

And the Torsoman and the Ripper weren't acting in the same area over the same period. The Ripper was active in a small area. The Torso Killer scattered body parts along twenty miles of the Thames. The Ripper was active for a few months. The Torso Killer was active for over a decade.

[Mike J. G.]

I'm afraid too much sand has fallen in the hourglass to accurately and effectively determine unknown victims of the Ripper. The best we can do is look at the modus operandi of the killer and look for similarities and patterns. But we also could be dealing with a copycat. I include Tabram as a Ripper victim as well, as she was a prostitute living in the exact same area, was found in a similar position as the others, and the extensive stab wounds indicate a frenzied attack and rage. It must also be noted that although violence against women was commonplace in the East End slums, murder of women was still relatively rare. And in those cases, the motives were robbery, gangs (Emma Smith), and domestic violence. Here we have a series of motiveless crimes, which was unknown to the Metropolitan Police, and they were virtually helpless in solving this type of crime. In the case of JTR and other psychopathic serial killers, the motive exists solely in the killer's mind. I'm very uninformed as to the details of the Torso Murderer; however, in Cleveland, Ohio in the 1930s there was a very similar serial killer operating in the Depression-era shanty towns and "Cody's Camps" of the day. This lunatic killed derelict men, mostly, though there was a female victim or two. He eluded capture, and even ruined the career of Eliot Ness, the former agent who had brought down Al Capone a few years before. Could the Victorian torso killer and JTR be one and the same? Certainly. Were they? Who knows. Happy hunting!

I don't know that I'd put too much stock into a copycat killer, as they're incredibly rare, but who knows.

As for the so-called "Torso Killer," I wonder just how likely it is to have two serial murderers operating in the same vicinity during the same period, but it can obviously happen. We do have George Chapman in Whitechapel who was a multiple murderer of women, and if he wasn't Jack then that makes two killers around the same period, potentially three if there was an actual Torso Killer.

As always, who knows!

[Mike J. G.]

This makes sense, but what about random unknowns.

For instance, Peter Sutcliffe was not suspected of having killed 5 or so women he had in fact killed, simply because they were not prostitutes.

We can also presume Jack as pressed for time, out in the open. He may not always be able to do what he wants and we're looking for a pattern that may not be present or has been hidden/misinterpreted.

I think Tabram was Ripper but she was stabbed, not ripped; however we know that in their infancy serial killers often have a period of working through what they want to do, changing weapons, tactic, MO etc.

These are the kinds of things I'm wondering about; especially as some think Jack was also Torso Man, which I'm very unsure about.

I'm inclined to agree with you, in that I really don't think we'll ever know the actual full list of victims of the Whitechapel killer(s).

I have doubts about whether they actually began with Nichols at all, or Tabrahm, for that matter. I also think too much emphasis is put onto the throat cutting/mutilation business. In all probability, "Jack" could have committed assaults to begin with, and even during his actual reign of terror he could've commited other non fatal assaults. The trouble is, we'll never no, so it's all speculation.

The police at the time were not accustomed to this activity, and while they definitely did what they were able to do, I think it's probable that a lot went unnoticed/unconnected. I'm not even sure if it ended with Kelly, although it may have done. A killer like "The Vampire of Dusseldorf" changed up his methods of killing several times, and even stopped killing for periods of time, as well as go from murder to non fatal assaults and even rape. One thing he enjoyed doing was waiting around after dumping a body so he could witness the public reaction, and I often wonder if "the Ripper" ever did something similar.

So as far as victims go, I'd be inclined to give a longer list than the C5 the benefit of the doubt, personally. But again, we'll never know.

[Holmes' Idiot Brother]

This makes sense, but what about random unknowns.

For instance, Peter Sutcliffe was not suspected of having killed 5 or so women he had in fact killed, simply because they were not prostitutes.

We can also presume Jack as pressed for time, out in the open. He may not always be able to do what he wants and we're looking for a pattern that may not be present or has been hidden/misinterpreted.

I think Tabram was Ripper but she was stabbed, not ripped; however we know that in their infancy serial killers often have a period of working through what they want to do, changing weapons, tactic, MO etc.

These are the kinds of things I'm wondering about; especially as some think Jack was also Torso Man, which I'm very unsure about.

I'm afraid too much sand has fallen in the hourglass to accurately and effectively determine unknown victims of the Ripper. The best we can do is look at the modus operandi of the killer and look for similarities and patterns. But we also could be dealing with a copycat. I include Tabram as a Ripper victim as well, as she was a prostitute living in the exact same area, was found in a similar position as the others, and the extensive stab wounds indicate a frenzied attack and rage. It must also be noted that although violence against women was commonplace in the East End slums, murder of women was still relatively rare. And in those cases, the motives were robbery, gangs (Emma Smith), and domestic violence. Here we have a series of motiveless crimes, which was unknown to the Metropolitan Police, and they were virtually helpless in solving this type of crime. In the case of JTR and other psychopathic serial killers, the motive exists solely in the killer's mind. I'm very uninformed as to the details of the Torso Murderer; however, in Cleveland, Ohio in the 1930s there was a very similar serial killer operating in the Depression-era shanty towns and "Cody's Camps" of the day. This lunatic killed derelict men, mostly, though there was a female victim or two. He eluded capture, and even ruined the career of Eliot Ness, the former agent who had brought down Al Capone a few years before. Could the Victorian torso killer and JTR be one and the same? Certainly. Were they? Who knows. Happy hunting!

[Tani]

First off, it would probably be a good idea to ignore McNaughten altogether; he didn't even work there at the time of the murders and was a desk jockey. His list of suspects is absurd, at best. Far better to listen to the varying opinions of the detectives on the ground, actually working the case. As to who is or is not a Ripper victim, I can only give my opinion: at least four, probably six (including Tabram), and a strong argument can be made against Stride being a victim. There are no shortage of suppositions as to the victims and the identity of the murderer. And this business fairly abounds in patterns and similarities. For example: all of the murders occurred between midnight and five A.M. on either the first weekend of the month or the last, or on a Bank Holiday, and all within the space of a few square acres. This tells us he was probably in regular employment. All of the victims were drabs of the lowest order (with the possible exception of Mary Jane Kelly, who is said to be young and attractive), all were alcoholics, all were killed with a sharp blade with a stroke to the throat after being choked unconscious or dead, and all were, to some extent or another, eviscerated in the foulest manner possible. What do these similarities tell us about the murderer? They tell us he was as much a creature of habit as he was of bad habits, and that is all they tell us.

This makes sense, but what about random unknowns.

For instance, Peter Sutcliffe was not suspected of having killed 5 or so women he had in fact killed, simply because they were not prostitutes.

We can also presume Jack as pressed for time, out in the open. He may not always be able to do what he wants and we're looking for a pattern that may not be present or has been hidden/misinterpreted.

I think Tabram was Ripper but she was stabbed, not ripped; however we know that in their infancy serial killers often have a period of working through what they want to do, changing weapons, tactic, MO etc.

These are the kinds of things I'm wondering about; especially as some think Jack was also Torso Man, which I'm very unsure about.

[Holmes' Idiot Brother]

How do we determine who was a victim of Jack the Ripper?

What criteria are we using?

First off, it would probably be a good idea to ignore McNaughten altogether; he didn't even work there at the time of the murders and was a desk jockey. His list of suspects is absurd, at best. Far better to listen to the varying opinions of the detectives on the ground, actually working the case. As to who is or is not a Ripper victim, I can only give my opinion: at least four, probably six (including Tabram), and a strong argument can be made against Stride being a victim. There are no shortage of suppositions as to the victims and the identity of the murderer. And this business fairly abounds in patterns and similarities. For example: all of the murders occurred between midnight and five A.M. on either the first weekend of the month or the last, or on a Bank Holiday, and all within the space of a few square acres. This tells us he was probably in regular employment. All of the victims were drabs of the lowest order (with the possible exception of Mary Jane Kelly, who is said to be young and attractive), all were alcoholics, all were killed with a sharp blade with a stroke to the throat after being choked unconscious or dead, and all were, to some extent or another, eviscerated in the foulest manner possible. What do these similarities tell us about the murderer? They tell us he was as much a creature of habit as he was of bad habits, and that is all they tell us.

[Geddy2112]

Variety is the lech of life

Lech is also a rather nice beer in Poland, but we digress..

[Tani]

....... and be in two places at the same time. Swap from Torso to Jack then back to Torso again. He was an effin' legend mate.

Variety is the lech of life

[Geddy2112]

But where did Lechmere find the time to kill all these women, go to work, have a family and write all the Ripper letters?

....... and be in two places at the same time. Swap from Torso to Jack then back to Torso again. He was an effin' legend mate.

[John Wheat]

According to some it's every woman murdered in the East End between 1870 and 1895.. that is the only criteria then need.

But where did Lechmere find the time to kill all these women, go to work, have a family and write all the Ripper letters?

[Geddy2112]

How do we determine who was a victim of Jack the Ripper?

According to some it's every woman murdered in the East End between 1870 and 1895.. that is the only criteria then need.

[The Rookie Detective]

The press thought the Pinchin Street Torso might be a Ripper victim. The police and the doctors did not.

And yet the Police all had different opinions, suspects and their own bias beliefs on who the Ripper could be.

The Doctors all hax different levels of expertise and input; including the notoriously inept Dr Philips whose poor decision making stemmed from shallow-minded arrogance.

The papers were also bias of course; The Star in particular being as trustworthy as a modern day tabloid like The Sun.


So where does that leave us?


No wonder the case was never solved


RD

[Fiver]

Let's also not forget the Pinchin Street Torso.

At the time this murder was seen as a Ripper victim.

The press thought the Pinchin Street Torso might be a Ripper victim. The police and the doctors did not.