Idiots Folly

[protohistorian]

Corey photographic identification was in it's infancy if it existed at all. Clothes were more of a feature for identification than photos. Dave

[corey123]

Hello Dave,

I am trying to see why that was a response to???(englighten me???) anyhow, regarding identification, that and scar's as in Jackson's case.

The identification came about by means of the clothing of the victim, her description, pregnant condition at the time of her disappearance and also the fact that Elizabeth had a scar on her wrist as a result of a childhood accident. This was investigated by the doctors and by lifting away a small amount of skin from the slightly decomposed arm of the victim they were able to locate traces of similar scar on the wrist.

Again written by Debra Arif.

[protohistorian]

How would disposing of her in the river thwart identification? Dave

[corey123]

Hello Errata,

Is this the line you are refering to?

[corey123]

Hello Dave,

No I was saying the removal of the head, in my opinion, seems like an attempt to complicate identification of the victim.

[protohistorian]

I think that is more of a modern conception than a Victorian one. Look at how many idents happened in various cases that were completely unrelated to the head. Jackson herself was confirmed by an previous arm injury. I suspect the head was taken for other reasons or removed unintentionally. As Errata has pointed out, if Dudley dimwit was floating people boats, when he floated the head it did a titanic act and so was not recovered. Placing the remains in the river at all slows decomp, which by Casper's law is 1/2 of that of air or 1/4 that of soil, with other parameters being equal. Dave

[corey123]

Hello Errata,

I think this would interest you. Have you read the accounts of the Torso murders in these two journals? A system of legal medicen and An exercize in forensice medicen.

They are both very enteresting and can be read here.

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=3607

Thanks much to Archiac, wherever she is.

[corey123]

Hello Dave,

The truth to the matter is that both explenations are equally probable.

Or, the head might be a trophy item of the killer. I have alway entertained that thought.

Yours truly

[protohistorian]

Okay I was not happy with that Casper's law thing. If decomposition is achieved in soil it is 8 units of time, in water it is 2 units and air it is 1 unit. It is a ratio assuming that all other variables are equal. Dave

[corey123]

Just out of interest what type of mixture of water is typefied with the Thames? I would think it would be a brackish misxture, running from the north Atlantic. Sure not fresh water.

Do you think this would have helped slow the decomosition rate?

[Errata]

Hello Errata,

You have a point with the disposal vrs. posing or as you said, sending a boat of limbs into the Thames. I still have trouble trying to guess why Jack the Ripper would change to such a different feature in his murders. Perhaps he was experimenting? I dunno if you noticed but I posted some anatomical reports detailing the injuries of four of the Torso murders as reported by Debra Arif, very interesting.

You are right, he didn't try to weigh them down. However I disagree on the head. I think he kept them to keep the authorities from identifying the bodies. You have to remember that just after the Rainham mystery, the Thames police division did a very thourough search of the banks and waters that month.

Just for reference, as seen in Dickens dictionary of London, 1888:

Thames Division.
Wapping, near the river.
George Skeats, Supt,;
Inspectors 49; Sergeants 4; Constables 147. Total 201.

It is clear they made a search by this news report in the Times of London, July 26, 1887.

The Rainham Mystery

The various human remains, which have been found from time to time at Rainham, Essex, in the Thames off Waterloo Pier, on the foreshore of the river off Battersea pier, and in the Regent's canal, Kentish Town, the remains comprising the arms(divided), the lower part of the thorax, the pelvis, both thighs, and the legs and feet, in fact the entire body excepting the head and upper part of the chest, are now in the possession of the police authorities.

To the point, I believe if the head's were at the bottem of the Thames, they would have been found.

It's sort of odd, but the head really is the most disposable part, once it's not attached. It doesn't require a big hole to bury it, it rolls, it has convenient grips.

I took a look at Battersea and the Thames in relation to it. In places it is quite narrow, maybe 30 yds across. But it other places it's quite wide. It is on the shipping lane of the Thames, so I imagine it gets pretty deep. If the murder occurred at a wide enough point in the Thames, and he threw the head, It might go deep enough to not get found. Or he could have kept it, sunk it in the marsh, tossed it in the sewers... who knows.

And yes that's the mark on Kelly. There is a mention of a cut that goes from calf to above the ankle, but that really looks like a circular cut. It's baffling.

See this is why I say I can see Kelly not being a Ripper victim, and Jackson being killed by the person who killed Kelly. To me, Jackson and Kelly have more in common than Kelly and the rest of the M5.

[protohistorian]

Thanks for this thread Corey, it is shaping up nicely! There is one thing about it, if we remove identification purposes from the equation (because it is a thin argument at best), the head becomes much more of an operational feature in the Elizabeth Jackson story. I know there are those who take the "well it could be..." (Insert untestable idea here) line of reasoning to dismiss the head being absent. The problem is it is one of the most telling elements of the case.
I wonder sometimes if the well it could be..... people ever think that the ultimate outcome of that line of reasoning is that no one died in Victorian London. God forbid I get bored and have to sit around and think of alternate scenarios for the destruction of the contemplations of others, because I have 2 years worth of my own dumb ass ideas in the closet that could be dusted off at a moments notice for just such a purpose.
Back to the head. If one excepts that the energy expenditure to get it was sufficient to merit keeping it, head abduction becomes an issue. When we look at the M5 progression the head appears to be a target on multiple occasions. This means that unsub has already conceived of the head as a trophy. It also means unsub has experience to go off of in his pursuit of a head. And wow, the Elizabeth Jackson timing is just about perfect for the processes of decomposition to render the M5 heart an unsuitable trophy. Throw in that Elizabeth's heart was never recovered, she was a poor prostitute, stir, and all of a sudden it is not such an idiot's folly. Dave

[Errata]

Hello Errata,

I think this would interest you. Have you read the accounts of the Torso murders in these two journals? A system of legal medicen and An exercize in forensice medicen.

They are both very enteresting and can be read here.

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=3607

Thanks much to Archiac, wherever she is.

I just read this, and whatever else you find, there is an interesting link between 3 of the 4 torso victims. And possibly the fourth had they ever found the pelvis. They were all culturally ineligible for sex. Jackson was pregnant, and the first and last torsos found were in their menstrual cycles. Victorians had massive taboos with engaging in sex with a woman in either state.

Of course, it would have been too much to ask that the doctors performing autopsies on the M5 would provide similar information. As far as I can tell, those with uteruses didnt have them examined.

[corey123]

Hello Dave,

You are completely right.

You are right to suggest that the reason he kept(again specualting) the head of Jackson was due to the decomposition of the Heart. Of coarse the heart is a muscel and I am taking a leap of faith when I say I believe it's decomposition rate is slow. Please correct me if Im wrong. Then after that the logical step would be to remove bone structures, the most likely would be... again the head. However, this is just a speculatory as it's possesion as a trophy, or it being kept for complicating identity.

Hello Errata,

Well if you look close at not only that leg, you will find that it may well be a stocking. However, it may be a cut, it justs looks(to me at least) like the edge of some type of foot wear.

[Errata]

Well if you look close at not only that leg, you will find that it may well be a stocking. However, it may be a cut, it justs looks(to me at least) like the edge of some type of foot wear.

Yeah I thought of that, but she wouldn't have silk stockings, they didn't have nylon yet, and thats not where stockings end in that period. They should be over the knee. And even if they were rolled down or sagging, they still would be thick cotton or wool, and her foot clearly is not encased in a sock-like thing.

This is irritating.