Torso Murders

[jerryd]

That passage you quote first was very much part of what I was commenting on, Jerry. Jackson, as you will remember, was found wrapped in her own clothing. And the Pinchin Street torso had a nightgown on.

Yes, we are on the same page then. The Whitehall torso was wrapped in clothing as well.

[Fisherman]

Christer,

My point was more about this line in particular:

They do not receive corpses for dissection with their clothes; nor is there any conceivable reason why, if they did, they should produce cuts and stabs and stains of blood on the clothes with such accuracy as to correspond to the effects of wounds inflicted on a living man.

The report also stated earlier in the clip [I'll transcribe the exact words later], that corpses of children were more likely to have been hidden or disposed of to avoid funeral costs. Rarely did that happen with adults.

That passage you quote first was very much part of what I was commenting on, Jerry. Jackson, as you will remember, was found wrapped in her own clothing. And the Pinchin Street torso had a nightgown on.

[jerryd]

Harley Street, Jerry - I somehow donīt think the doctors of that particular street were too happy about that find...

The reasoning behind the idea that it was a murder is elucidating in itīs straightforwardness- to me, at least. What Trevor will think, I donīt know; he will probably call it reckless.

Christer,

My point was more about this line in particular:

They do not receive corpses for dissection with their clothes; nor is there any conceivable reason why, if they did, they should produce cuts and stabs and stains of blood on the clothes with such accuracy as to correspond to the effects of wounds inflicted on a living man.

The report also stated earlier in the clip [I'll transcribe the exact words later], that corpses of children were more likely to have been hidden or disposed of to avoid funeral costs. Rarely did that happen with adults.

[Fisherman]

Harley Street, Jerry - I somehow donīt think the doctors of that particular street were too happy about that find...

The reasoning behind the idea that it was a murder is elucidating in itīs straightforwardness- to me, at least. What Trevor will think, I donīt know; he will probably call it reckless.

[jerryd]

Here's a good perspective from the medical men in 1880, after a woman was found in a barrel in a cellar in Harley Street.

Observer London Middlesex June 6, 1880

[Debra A]

Fifty-first annual report of the registrar-general

London-Cause of death females 1888

Besides detailed cause of death figures for various diseases is this other tabled data:

Cause of death ill defined or nor specified
age group 25-35 -13
age group 35-45 -9
age group 45-55 -18

cause of death murder
age 25-35 - 2
age 35-45 - 7
age 45-55 - 7

cause of death suicide
age 25-35 -15
age 35-45 -33
age 45-55 -23

cause of death by procuring abortion or miscarriage
age 25-35 -6
age 35- 45 -6
age 45-55 -0
(These are women who died after an abortion and this was put on the death certificate as the cause-none of the women had been dismembered)

[Debra A]

And after dismembering the victim she put among other parts flaps of skin into a bag and tossed it into the thames.

Look, that term flaps of skin is mentioned again !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you accept that the term flaps of skin is a generic term and not confined to the 4 thames torsos?

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Were they flaps of skin taken from her abdomen? That's the specific thing we are talking about.

For the last time Trevor- I am well aware of what a flap is. It is a descriptive term for a piece of flesh-yes, you are right there.

[Trevor Marriott]

One last one Trevor- Elliot O'Donell's book on the 1879 trial of Kate Webster for killing her mistress even details the small amount of dismemberment cases prior to that, all ones we know about as they were always reported in the press as I said in an earlier post.

And after dismembering the victim she put among other parts flaps of skin into a bag and tossed it into the thames.

Look, that term flaps of skin is mentioned again !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you accept that the term flaps of skin is a generic term and not confined to the 4 thames torsos?

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

No, you are wrong. Those are not torso cases or body parts, those figures reflect men, women and children whose bodies were found in the Thames. An 'open verdict' of 'found drowned' was common and there was no way a medical man could tell whether it was a suicidal drowning, an accidental drowning or deliberate drowning without any supporting evidence e.g. signs of violence, suicide note etc. They all drowned-can you not understand that? I've seen numerous of those verdicts in drowning cases-an open verdict of found drowned where the jury were unable to say how the person got into the water.

I have looked. Thames dismemberment cases were very rare, that is why the three similar in three years are interesting. I have also looked at other dismemberment cases where bodies were placed in gardens, barrels in the cellar, chimneys and so on. They were not a common occurrence and you are skewing the statistics to claim they say something they actually don't!

I am being logical and looking at this in an unbiased fashion, can you do the same?

Does it matter where the dismembered bodies were found. in the river. or in someone's front garden. They have to have been proved to have been murdered. Dismemberment could have been for many reasons.

In fact that figure of 547 would be enhanced by dismembered bodies and body parts being found. It is also on record that women did die from back street medical procedures, even you have to accept that and when they did the bodies needed to be got rid of and their identities hidden.

Not to miss the point, do you accept that dismembered bodies, and body parts turning up were quite common? Not forgetting that not all the body parts were found in the thames.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Debra A]

One last one Trevor- Elliot O'Donell's book on the 1879 trial of Kate Webster for killing her mistress even details the small amount of dismemberment cases prior to that, all ones we know about as they were always reported in the press as I said in an earlier post.

[Debra A]

Hi Debra
you and fish have the patience of a saint. I don't know how you maintain your sanity.

No, mine's running out rapidly, Abby!

[Abby Normal]

No, you are wrong. Those are not torso cases or body parts, those figures reflect men, women and children whose bodies were found in the Thames. An 'open verdict' of 'found drowned' was common and there was no way a medical man could tell whether it was a suicidal drowning, an accidental drowning or deliberate drowning without any supporting evidence e.g. signs of violence, suicide note etc. They all drowned-can you not understand that? I've seen numerous of those verdicts in drowning cases-an open verdict of found drowned where the jury were unable to say how the person got into the water.

I have looked. Thames dismemberment cases were very rare, that is why the three similar in three years are interesting. I have also looked at other dismemberment cases where bodies were placed in gardens, barrels in the cellar, chimneys and so on. They were not a common occurrence and you are skewing the statistics to claim they say something they actually don't!

Hi Debra
you and fish have the patience of a saint. I don't know how you maintain your sanity.

[Debra A]

If Trevor wants to believe that the victorian medicos could tell a suicidal drowning from an accidental one, then I suggest we let him do so; he is normally not very generous towards the victorian medicos so this makes for a welcome change...

They can't win can they?

[Fisherman]

Trevor Marriott: I have no need to find them, but you do to add weight to your misguided theory.

And you conclude it is misguided because...?

Ooopsie, Trevor.

I already mentioned another detected murder of a female in 1879 by another female, where the body was dismembered and parts thrown in the Thames.

And were the cuts without frays, clean and neat? Was she eviscerated? Had her abdominal wall been removed?

You see, otherwise she is totally uninteresting. Much like your arguing in this case.

So you see bodies and body parts were a common thing turning up in the Thames. In this case flaps of skin were also described, and were seemingly described on many other occasions. So the term flaps of skin is nothing that links all 4 torsos.

What is the superlative of moronic?
The "term" was never suggested as linking them. The fact that they all had their abdominal walls taken away in large flaps does, however - decisively so.

Dr Biggs told you that there are only so many ways to cut up a body.

And that has nothing at all to do with the links between the murders.

Clean cuts are obtained with a sharp knife, even you must comprehend that ?

Now, what was it Dr Biggs said about dismemberment murders? That they were clean, neat affairs? No, that was not it. Hmmm, let me see ... AH!! Now I remember: He said that they were always sloppy affairs, with frays and tears!

Does that mean that all the cases he saw were performed with a dull knife, Trevor? What do you think? Put me to the sword!!

[Debra A]

Oh so you reckon the best part of 547 toros/body parts fished out of the thames were as a result of victims being thrown in or suicides by drowning ? I am sure some were.

But if bodies were intact there would be no problem for the doctors would there, drowning, suicide, easy to determine cause of death. But the open verdict figures tell us that it was not the case in those open verdicts. otherwise they would not have been open.

We dont know the ratio of males or females or dismembered corpses, but what we are told is that body parts and dismembered bodies were quite common.

So as they were quite common you highlight only 4 cases in 3 years, a drop in the ocean are they not amongst the many cases, or should I say a drop in the thames.

With all you research expertise I am surprised you haven't uncovered details of other dismembered corpses and body parts so we can see what the verdicts were on those and look at those in the same way these 4 torsos are being looked at

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

No, you are wrong. Those are not torso cases or body parts, those figures reflect men, women and children whose bodies were found in the Thames. An 'open verdict' of 'found drowned' was common and there was no way a medical man could tell whether it was a suicidal drowning, an accidental drowning or deliberate drowning without any supporting evidence e.g. signs of violence, suicide note etc. They all drowned-can you not understand that? I've seen numerous of those verdicts in drowning cases-an open verdict of found drowned where the jury were unable to say how the person got into the water.

I have looked. Thames dismemberment cases were very rare, that is why the three similar in three years are interesting. I have also looked at other dismemberment cases where bodies were placed in gardens, barrels in the cellar, chimneys and so on. They were not a common occurrence and you are skewing the statistics to claim they say something they actually don't!