Torso Murders

[Harry D]

Don't mean to digress but can someone recommend the best book on the Torso Murders? M.J Trow's seems to be the most popular on Amazon.

[John Wheat]

Don't mean to digress but can someone recommend the best book on the Torso Murders? M.J Trow's seems to be the most popular on Amazon.

To Harry

M.J. Trow's is the best book on the Torso Murders in my opinion.

Cheers John

[Fisherman]

I donŽt really think either of the books is good; both Gordons and Trows books involve mistakes.
Gordon of course sees George Chapman as the combined Ripper and Torso man, and so the book is heavily tilted, for example leaving out the 1873 and 1874 victims, instead offering the Salamanca Place torso of 1902 as belonging to the series - which it in all probability never did.

Trow makes a number of factual errors that are sometimes rather glaring. For example, in combination with reasoning about Kosminski (in a book on the Torso killings, yes...), he names two doctors who diagnozed Aaron, Edmund King and Edmund Honchin. Of course, they were the same man, Edmund King Houchin.

So either way you pick, you need to read with great care. I would recommend never straying far from the writings of Hebbert and Bond when digesting these books.

[Pierre]

You are lumping all these torsos together, wrongly suggesting they were all murdered. You are forgetting that bodies and body parts were regularly fished out of the thames, were they all murdered to, or is it only these females that you suggest were all murdered.

Was it only murdered females that were dismembered and thrown in the thames.I think if you speak to the worlds authority on the torsos she will tell you that it was a regular occurrence.

Get it into your thick head that murder cannot be proven in the majority of cases !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and where verdicts of murder were given by coroners courts. the course of conduct by the coroner beggars belief as I have highlighted.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hi,

I am trying to understand the Jackson case but I have a hard time interpreting it. I also lack data for the time period and therefore can not place a hypothesis for someone being a killer in this time period. There can be a clear motive but the possibility might not be there.

I have no reason to think it was a murder performed by Jack the Ripper. It is not his MO. The body parts are not put on display but hidden in the Thames. The two parts on dry land, in Battersea and in the Shelley garden, indicates that someone was on his way to throw the piece into the water, but met someone on the way and could not get to the water.

The only possible link to Jack the Ripper I see is the letter to Leman Street police station and maybe the signature, if that is what we can call the "flaps" he cut, which could have been more or less similar to the same damage on the body of Chapman.

I would really have to understand this case much better to be able to postulate, as an hypothesis, that it was murder at all. One could believe it was, but if it were - I do not really recognize the killer.

Regards, Pierre

[Fisherman]

Hi,

I am trying to understand the Jackson case but I have a hard time interpreting it. I also lack data for the time period and therefore can not place a hypothesis for someone being a killer in this time period. There can be a clear motive but the possibility might not be there.

I have no reason to think it was a murder performed by Jack the Ripper. It is not his MO. The body parts are not put on display but hidden in the Thames. The two parts on dry land, in Battersea and in the Shelley garden, indicates that someone was on his way to throw the piece into the water, but met someone on the way and could not get to the water.

The only possible link to Jack the Ripper I see is the letter to Leman police station and maybe the signature, if that is what we can call the "flaps" he cut, which could have been more or less similar to the same damage on the body of Chapman.

I would really have to understand this case much better to be able to postulate, as an hypothesis, that it was murder at all. One could believe it was, but if it were - I do not really recognize the killer.

Regards, Pierre

Jackson had her abdominal cavity opened up all the way - Chapman had her abdominal cavity opened up all the way.

Jackson had her uterus removed, together with part of the bladder attached - Chapman had her uterus removed together with part of the bladder attached.

Jackson was a destitute prostitute - Chapman was a destitute prostitute

Jackson had her abdominal wall removed in large flaps - Chapman had her abdominal wall removed in large flaps.

The cuts to the body of Jackson were very skilfully made, impressing the medicos who examined her - the cuts to the body of Chapman were skilfull made, impressing the medico who examined her.

Maybe we can recognize a certain killer after all, when looking at the damage done to Jackson?

[Pierre]

Jackson had her abdominal cavity opened up all the way - Chapman had her abdominal cavity opened up all the way.

Jackson had her uterus removed, together with part of the bladder attached - Chapman had her uterus removed together with part of the bladder attached.

Jackson was a destitute prostitute - Chapman was a destitute prostitute

Jackson had her abdominal wall removed in large flaps - Chapman had her abdominal wall removed in large flaps.

The cuts to the body of Jackson were very skilfully made, impressing the medicos who examined her - the cuts to the body of Chapman were skilfull made, impressing the medico who examined her.

Maybe we can recognize a certain killer after all, when looking at the damage done to Jackson?

Hi Fisherman,

Good comparative list, I will analyse these "facts" myself as soon as I have the time.

Kind regards, Pierre

[Abby Normal]

Exactly Trevor,
No cause of death could be established.That is the important part,and as such no Prima Facia case would have been established.Not under English Law that is.No intent to murder,unless a confession could be extracted,and that is concerning the death,and not what happened after death.

as has be pointed out-three of the seven the verdict was murder-and the rest are linked by sig and MO. plus a little dosage of common sense and you can see that in all probability they were murdered.

its this same kind of closed minded pedantic, and quite frankly-stupid thinking that caused the moronic jury in Florida(of course it was Florida-LOL)case of Caylie Anthony to find the mother not quilty, mainly because it couldn't be proven she was murdered. eventhough she was found bound with duck tape around her head. give me a break.

[Abby Normal]

To Abby Normal

I would say Wentworth Bellsmith as he moved into Penge, London in 1873 before the first Torso Mutder and left London shortly after the 1889 Torso murder. Also in 1887 I believe was the breakdown of his first marriage if I remember correctly, which could have been a trigger for the 1887-1889 Torso Murders. Also if Francis Tumblety could be placed in London in 1889 he would be worth considering. He was certainly in England in 1973 although wether he was in London is a different matter.

Cheers John

ive heard that name-Bellsmith- put out before. could you tell us a little bit more about him and why you think he makes a good suspect?

[Abby Normal]

To Harry

M.J. Trow's is the best book on the Torso Murders in my opinion.

Cheers John

a good book on the torsos has not been produced yet (hi Debra!!!-hint hint).
and trow is lame. I saw a documentary on the ripper where he was claiming the killer was a mortuary attendant-Mann was the name I believe. It was the worst ripper docs Ive ever seen. actually one of the worst documentary ive evr seen. I have no faith in him or any of his work at all.

[Fisherman]

a good book on the torsos has not been produced yet (hi Debra!!!-hint hint).
and trow is lame. I saw a documentary on the ripper where he was claiming the killer was a mortuary attendant-Mann was the name I believe. It was the worst ripper docs Ive ever seen. actually one of the worst documentary ive evr seen. I have no faith in him or any of his work at all.

Mmm - the Robert Mann accusation file was a bit embarrasing, to say the least. TrowŽs supposed to be a very nice guy overall, but IŽm not sure that helps...

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi,

I am trying to understand the Jackson case but I have a hard time interpreting it. I also lack data for the time period and therefore can not place a hypothesis for someone being a killer in this time period. There can be a clear motive but the possibility might not be there.

I have no reason to think it was a murder performed by Jack the Ripper. It is not his MO. The body parts are not put on display but hidden in the Thames. The two parts on dry land, in Battersea and in the Shelley garden, indicates that someone was on his way to throw the piece into the water, but met someone on the way and could not get to the water.

The only possible link to Jack the Ripper I see is the letter to Leman Street police station and maybe the signature, if that is what we can call the "flaps" he cut, which could have been more or less similar to the same damage on the body of Chapman.

I would really have to understand this case much better to be able to postulate, as an hypothesis, that it was murder at all. One could believe it was, but if it were - I do not really recognize the killer.

Regards, Pierre

The term flaps of skin as a medical term was explained by Dr Biggs there is nothing sinister in this. although one person is using them as a direct link to the murders and one killer who killed all !!!!!!!!!

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Fisherman]

The term flaps of skin as a medical term was explained by Dr Biggs there is nothing sinister in this. although one person is using them as a direct link to the murders and one killer who killed all !!!!!!!!!

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Dr Biggs believed that the flaps of skin were collateral damage such as tongues of skin joining chunks of meat that had not been completely severed from each other.

It seems you never took him out of that misconception, Trevor, which is a shame and not very honourable.

The flaps of skin cut away from Chapman, Kelly and Jackson were their abdominal walls, cut in four, three and two pieces, respectively. Have you grasped that, Trevor?

[RockySullivan]

If I am correct, he did not consider it tedious at all to remove the face from the 1873 victim. The head as such was never recovered, so if he hid it from the world, why not hide the face with it? Instead he floated it down the Thames where it was recovered, and allowed the medicos to stretch it over a wooden block for identification purposes. Not the most efficient identification disenabling, IŽd say!

As for cutting the neck, it was concluded that the body had been bled off, since there was not a clot of blood to be found anywhere in the vessels of the retrieved body parts It was suggested that this bleeding was performed via the cut vessels of the neck,
However, the reason of death in this particular case was probably the two hard blows to the temple, according to Dr Kempster. The absence of the head and skull made it impossible to confirm Kempsters guess.

So what do we have? We have a murder (that WAS what the jury concluded, Trevor) where a woman was hit on the temple, probably killing her. We know that the body was cut up very close in time to death, so technically, the cutting could actually have commenced even before the temple blows. The killer then bled the victim, arguably by means of severing the large neck vessels. And then he meticulously cut the face and scalp away from the skull, and floated this horrific death mask down the Thames together with the other body parts. with a possible exception of the skull which was never recovered. It may of course just have sunk to then bottom of the Thames. In any case, he had no reason to hide it since there were no features left to identify the victim by. The cutting work was skillfully performed, just as in the later cases. The removal of the face and scalp by means of the knife was just one example of how skilled a cutter the killer was.

Good observation. I think the strangeness of the torso murders, tells us the killer would have appeared incredibly normal. The more freakier the freak the more normal he appears?

[Abby Normal]

Good observation. I think the strangeness of the torso murders, tells us the killer would have appeared incredibly normal. The more freakier the freak the more normal he appears?

I would pretty much agree with this.

[Errata]

Good observation. I think the strangeness of the torso murders, tells us the killer would have appeared incredibly normal. The more freakier the freak the more normal he appears?

Yes if you go by the Gein model, Absolutely not if you go by the Chase model.