Torso Murders

[Pierre]

Pierre

Can I congratulate you on a post which says loads, but avoids all the points I made, giving no information at all!

That is the reply I was expecting, and hoping for.

Thank you so very much, that is very helpful.

Steve

Hi Steve,

if you read it again, it might get clearer. At least I hope so.

Kind regards, Pierre

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

if you read it again, it might get clearer. At least I hope so.

Kind regards, Pierre

Thats ok Pierre

I got the answer I wanted.

Steve

[Pierre]

Pierre

I have just seen your reply to Joshua:

"Yes, I know that the victim probably died 2 months before they found her. That historical fact can be placed in a solid time frame of other historical facts."


Must say I am somewhat at a lose, really fail to see how that squares with the earlier comment:


"My own answer to the last question, considering the Whitehall victim, is that one must understand the Whitehall victim from an hypothesis about the murderer experiencing very disturbing events in the days from the 30th of September to the 2nd of October 1888. Such an hypothesis implies an escalation of activities, where the murderer must let off steem to handle his situation. But that is just an hypothesis, although it is easy to produce sources for it."


Steve

Hi Steve,

I will try to make myself as clear as I can.

If you hypothesize that a murderer has committed a series of murders, you need sources on a micro level to back up the hypothesis or to try and disprove it.

The sources must give dates in the murderers life which correspond to the dates of the murders.

I am sorry for speaking normatively but these are the norms that I have and these are the criteria for a chain of events, if there was such a chain.

Kind regards, Pierre

[Pierre]

Thanks Steve,

It is hard to determine the exact date, yes. However, the arm was not subject to the length of decomposition that the trunk was. To me, it seems it would have been easier to determine an approximate date of death by the condition of the arm than the badly decomposing torso that was discovered almost a month later.

The Pinchin case was also thought to be a September 8th death in 1889. I've been told many times I'm pushing the connections and maybe I am, but it is a rather interesting fact, is it not?

Hi,

I can not get hold of the sources I need for the autumn of 1889 and that is very frustrating right now. I think the statements of John Arnold are important.

Regards, Pierre

[jerryd]

Hi,

I can not get hold of the sources I need for the autumn of 1889 and that is very frustrating right now. I think the statements of John Arnold are important.

Regards, Pierre

What sources are you looking for? I have a bunch on John Arnold.

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

I will try to make myself as clear as I can.

If you hypothesize that a murderer has committed a series of murders, you need sources on a micro level to back up the hypothesis or to try and disprove it.

The sources must give dates in the murderers life which correspond to the dates of the murders.

I am sorry for speaking normatively but these are the norms that I have and these are the criteria for a chain of events, if there was such a chain.

Kind regards, Pierre

Pierre

That is not answering the question, and you are well aware of that.

How does post 52, square with your comments in post 96.


"one must understand the Whitehall victim from an hypothesis about the murderer experiencing very disturbing events in the days from the 30th of September to the 2nd of October 1888."



This implies the torso is directly linked to the events following the double event, until the discovery of the Whitehall torso.

Given the Whitehall torso was probably there in early September, how can that be true?


The two comments are contrary to each other, and no amount of semantics will change that.


Steve

[Elamarna]

Hi,

I can not get hold of the sources I need for the autumn of 1889 and that is very frustrating right now. I think the statements of John Arnold are important.

Regards, Pierre

Pierre,

are you actively looking for the sources you say you need? maybe others could help you.

Steve

[Abby Normal]

Hello Debra,

Well, of course, I didn't suggest that other posters didn't have the right to express their own views, even though, on occasion, I may disagree with them. However, unfortunately at least one poster seems to be of the opinion that I shouldn't express my opinions on this thread, which is regrettable to say the least. I trust you are not of the same opinion?

However, perhaps I could, on occasion, express myself better. For instance, regarding autopsy reports, although everyone clearly has the right to express an opinion, what I would regard as "informative opinion" is that given by a medical professional. That, of course, does not mean that opinions expressed by non-medical professionals should be automatically discounted, or that they are necessarily wrong. For instance, I would acknowledge that your understanding of the medical reports is superior to my own, which is why are often consult your opinions, and therefore are relevant. And I apologise if you think I was suggesting the contrary.

I disagree that Dr Biggs' views are irrelevant: his statement that perpetrators adopt similar strategies for dismembering bodies, so the final results tend to look similar, for instance, is surely relevant. Do you disagree?

I have not, to my knowledge, relied on inaccurate summaries by Trevor Marriott. In fact, I've never quoted Trevor, only the opinions of the experts he consulted. I therefore struggle to understand the point that's being made. However, if you are contending that I have quoted Trevor, I would be obliged if you could refer me to the relevant post.

Regarding Dr Phillips' views. This is the reference: http://www.casebook.org/press_report...l?printer=true

Hi John
I just noticed this

However, unfortunately at least one poster seems to be of the opinion that I shouldn't express my opinions on this thread, which is regrettable to say the least.

If you are referring to me, and I think you are, I never said you shouldn't express your opinions. please don't misrepresent me.

However, I do think you have already made up your mind and I believe the first time we had a dust up was over this very same matter.

so at this point, I think, for the sake of sanity, I'm going to drop it.

I will just add, though, usually you are also one of the more sensible posters on here to, but this subject seems to touch a nerve for some reason (me too).

fyi-I gave you a solid on the other thread about FT as viable candidate for JTR.
theres nothing that rules him out for being the torso man also does there? ; )
think about it...

[John G]

Hi John
I just noticed this




If you are referring to me, and I think you are, I never said you shouldn't express your opinions. please don't misrepresent me.

However, I do think you have already made up your mind and I believe the first time we had a dust up was over this very same matter.

so at this point, I think, for the sake of sanity, I'm going to drop it.

I will just add, though, usually you are also one of the more sensible posters on here to, but this subject seems to touch a nerve for some reason (me too).

fyi-I gave you a solid on the other thread about FT as viable candidate for JTR.
theres nothing that rules him out for being the torso man also does there? ; )
think about it...

Hello Abby,

Okay, I realize I misunderstood what was implied by your earlier post, so I apologise for that. Perhaps I should read posts more carefully although, in my defence, I was a bit confused at the time because of the dental pain I was experiencing! So, sorry Abby.

I am honestly prepared to be objective and, in that regard, I change my mind on issues all the time. For instance, on the Morris Lewis thread, I argued initially that Maxwell's and Lewis's evidence was unreliable. However, having considers David's arguments, I changed my mind and agreed that there was no good reason why Kelly couldn't have been killed at a later time. And, before posting on Casebook, I would have thought it ridiculous to suggest that Schwartz wasn't reliable but, as I'm sure you're aware I no longer have that opinion! I also once argued that Hutchinson was pretty much a none starter as a suspect, but you and Ben have convinced me otherwise.

Is there anything that rules Thompson out as being Torso Man? Well, I think whoever that individual(s) was it's pretty much a certainty that they must have had access to a storage and dismemberment site as well as transport. And, although I may be wrong, I would have thought those facts would undermine most JtR candidates.

[Joshua Rogan]

Try this stuff, John, it's surprisingly effective!

http://www.orajel.co.uk

[Abby Normal]

Hello Abby,

Okay, I realize I misunderstood what was implied by your earlier post, so I apologise for that. Perhaps I should read posts more carefully although, in my defence, I was a bit confused at the time because of the dental pain I was experiencing! So, sorry Abby.

I am honestly prepared to be objective and, in that regard, I change my mind on issues all the time. For instance, on the Morris Lewis thread, I argued initially that Maxwell's and Lewis's evidence was unreliable. However, having considers David's arguments, I changed my mind and agreed that there was no good reason why Kelly couldn't have been killed at a later time. And, before posting on Casebook, I would have thought it ridiculous to suggest that Schwartz wasn't reliable but, as I'm sure you're aware I no longer have that opinion! I also once argued that Hutchinson was pretty much a none starter as a suspect, but you and Ben have convinced me otherwise.

Is there anything that rules Thompson out as being Torso Man? Well, I think whoever that individual(s) was it's pretty much a certainty that they must have had access to a storage and dismemberment site as well as transport. And, although I may be wrong, I would have thought those facts would undermine most JtR candidates.

Thanks John
Appreciate that.

What or where was FT doing in summer and early fall of 1889 when mckenzie was murdered and the pinchin torso? You see where I'm going with this and I'm being totally serious.

[jerryd]

Thanks John
Appreciate that.

What or where was FT doing in summer and early fall of 1889 when mckenzie was murdered and the pinchin torso? You see where I'm going with this and I'm being totally serious.

According to this https://books.google.com/books?id=rg...201888&f=false [pages 663-664] he was at the Storrington Priory from mid summer 1889 to February 1890 when he returned to London. It was at the Priory that he wrote his famous essay on Percy Shelley, husband of Mary Shelley.

[John Wheat]

Where was Francis Thompson in 1873, 1874 and 1884 or are people saying the Torso murders in those years are not related to the Torso murders in 1887, 1888 and 1889?

[John Wheat]

Does anyone else believe The Batty Street Lodger is more likely to be The Torso Killer than he is to be Jack? To be clear I am not saying The Lodger was the Torso Killer.

[MrBarnett]

Where was Francis Thompson in 1873, 1874 and 1884 or are people saying the Torso murders in those years are not related to the Torso murders in 1887, 1888 and 1889?

Where was Francis Thompson in November, 1888?

That would be a start.