Torso Murders

[John Wheat]

This Thread is about The Torso Murders not the alleged abortions gone wrong b.s. It is in The Torso Murders section. I'd really appreciate if this thread wasn't continually derailed by fairy stories about how The Torso Victims weren't murdered and dismembered.

[Trevor Marriott]

This Thread is about The Torso Murders not the alleged abortions gone wrong b.s. It is in The Torso Murders section. I'd really appreciate if this thread wasn't continually derailed by fairy stories about how The Torso Victims weren't murdered and dismembered.

You theory that they were all murdered is a fairy story---GRIMM

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Trevor Marriott]

A coroners jury is not a trial jury.Irrespective of any verdict by the former,a murder charge,in a trial, requires evidence a murder has been commited.First and foremost,and a cause of death established.
One blow or two,ivé no doubt a good defense would provide ample evidence that head injuries of a more numerous and forcefull nature,have not resulted in death,and that alternatives to murder was a valid consideration.
As regards the police and the torsos, there is little evidence of what they believed,or what steps were taken by them,and even less evidence they connected the two separate series of crimes,and none at all that Cross was a perpetrator.

You are correct the object is to determine a cause of death. In the case of Jackson where is the cause of death determined ? Should have been recorded as an open verdict, or as they did with some of the verdicts "found dead"

But the latter has now resulted in some on here coming up with their own verdicts of "wilful murder"

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[John Wheat]

You theory that they were all murdered is a fairy story---GRIMM

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

No it isn't its the only sensible conclusion.

[Abby Normal]

Stupid am I Abby.
Well consider,nowwhere in my postings have I said the torso killings were not murder,So read my posts carefully before making such comments.
You and others presume they are murders,yet the most important element in proving murder is missing.That is ,the cause of death.Now that I think is stupid.
I know we should all think like you and fisherman,you both are so knowledgeable,articulate,and wellversed in both the torso and ripper crimes.Unfortunately you do not seem so understanding when it comes to defining w hat is murder,nor how the law interprets it.
By the way,what was the law in those days?

I don't think they had a verdict in those days of suicide by self dismemberment.

I cant prove the sun will come up tomorrow-common sense is all that's really needed to figure it out though.

[Robert St Devil]

Remember, remember, the 8th of September...

All the Thames torso victims were dismembered very close in time to death; this is obvious from the muscle contraction.

Thanks, Fisherman. It raises plenty of questions, like how would ,they, hide the stench of all those decomposing body parts; moreso, with the Whitehall victim if he ,hung onto, the trunk for nearly a month. Also, if he did dismember them shortly before/after their death, it would appear to be a part of his overall method.

Forum:
I know the aspect of the date being the anniversary of Annie Chapman,s murder, but there is also suggestion that the Whitehall victim may have been murdered on/near the 8th of September. Is there some public significance for this date in London?

[Abby Normal]

Thanks, Fisherman. It raises plenty of questions, like how would ,they, hide the stench of all those decomposing body parts; moreso, with the Whitehall victim if he ,hung onto, the trunk for nearly a month. Also, if he did dismember them shortly before/after their death, it would appear to be a part of his overall method.

Forum:
I know the aspect of the date being the anniversary of Annie Chapman,s murder, but there is also suggestion that the Whitehall victim may have been murdered on/near the 8th of September. Is there some public significance for this date in London?

Hi Robert

The dismemberment close to time of death also points in the direction that these were MURDERS-something which a few folks on here seem to be struggling with for some reason.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Fish and Debra
what are the significant factors-similarities-you see between the 70's torso victims and the 80's victims that may tie them together? (other than just the dismemberment of course).

[Joshua Rogan]

Thanks, Fisherman. It raises plenty of questions, like how would ,they, hide the stench of all those decomposing body parts; moreso, with the Whitehall victim if he ,hung onto, the trunk for nearly a month. Also, if he did dismember them shortly before/after their death, it would appear to be a part of his overall method.

Forum:
I know the aspect of the date being the anniversary of Annie Chapman,s murder, but there is also suggestion that the Whitehall victim may have been murdered on/near the 8th of September. Is there some public significance for this date in London?

I'm not aware of any significance to the date, however it seems unlikely that the Whitehall torso victim died on 8th Sept. The arm was fished from the river on 11th Sept, and was thought to have been in the water for a month by Dr Bond. Also, the leg found in mid October was buried under the spoil-heap of a trench that was thought to be dug 10-12 weeks earlier. The torso itself was thought to have been dead 6-8 weeks from early Oct.
All of which points to an estimated TOD in early-mid August. However, the piece of newspaper dated Aug 24th may point to a more precise date.

[jerryd]

I'm not aware of any significance to the date, however it seems unlikely that the Whitehall torso victim died on 8th Sept. The arm was fished from the river on 11th Sept, and was thought to have been in the water for a month by Dr Bond. Also, the leg found in mid October was buried under the spoil-heap of a trench that was thought to be dug 10-12 weeks earlier. The torso itself was thought to have been dead 6-8 weeks from early Oct.
All of which points to an estimated TOD in early-mid August. However, the piece of newspaper dated Aug 24th may point to a more precise date.

Dr Neville, who first examined the arm, felt it came from a body that died approximately 3 days earlier. The arm was placed in spirits and examined a week later by Bond.

It must have been removed from the body of a person murdered
but a day or two ago, as when touched the blood began to trickle freshly from it. -Dr Neville-

Because of the immediate decay process in the body upon death, I doubt after a month it would have fresh blood trickling from it.

More Neville quotes:

Echo
12 September 1888

Dr. Thomas Neville, surgeon of 85, Pimlico-road, and of 128, Sloane-street, subsequently made an examination of the arm. It appears that the limb is the right arm of a female, probably of some 25 or 30 years of age. It has been severed at the shoulder-joint, and has the appearance of having been in the water some two or three days. The cut was not skillfully made, and was such as would be the case had the operation been performed by a person ignorant of the elements of anatomy. Round the arm and above the elbow was a piece of string, tied somewhat tightly, but not sufficiently taut to produce much of an indentation. It is thought not unlikely that by some of those who assume that a tragedy has been committed, that the string may have been employed to prevent the blood oozing through the veins, and so causing a risk of splashing to the person disposing of the severed limb. If this was the intention the artifice was scarcely successful, as when taken from the river there was still some bleeding. Another conjecture is that the string was merely attached for the purpose of easy carriage. At any rate, this was the idea which struck the police-constable, who conveyed the limb to the police-station by means of another piece of string attached to that already round the remains.

DR. NEVILLE'S OPINION

Dr. Neville is of opinion that the woman met her death about three days ago, probably on Sunday, and that the limb was cut off soon after the poor creature's decease. There is now an impression that the piece of string on the limb was tied round for the purpose of attaching a weight in order to sink it. Search has been made in the mud at the wharf, but no weight could be traced. The police authorities are this morning confident that the arm was thrown into the Thames at the spot where it was found- or a very short distance from it- and the medical testimony is to the effect that the flesh reveals evident signs of very recent immersion.


Daily News
3 October 1888

The trunk is pronounced by the medical gentlemen to have belonged to a remarkably fine young woman, and this at once gives good grounds to the theory that it belonged to the body of which the arm found on the 11th ult in the Thames, near Grosvenor road, formed a part. It will be remembered that on that date the right arm of a woman was discovered in the river, and upon Dr.Neville having it submitted to him for inspection he pronounced it to have belonged to a woman of apparently from 25 to 30 years of age. This limb had been in the water for about three days, so that if yesterday's discovery is connected with it the date of the murder would be somewhere about the 8th of September. Dr. Neville, the Divisional Police Surgeon for Pimlico, who examined the arms of a woman found in the Thames as above stated on the 11th September, has not yet been called to see the body, neither does he expect to be called. He states that in his opinion the time which Dr. Bond allows for the decease of this mutilated victim would agree with his own conclusion that the woman, whoever she may be, had been dead about the same period. Dr. Neville states that there would be no difficulty in ascertaining whether the arm belonged to the remains found yesterday. He came to the conclusion, when he examined the limb submitted to him, that it was that of a big woman. Dr. Bond also avers that the remains submitted to him are those of a woman of no small stature. Since Dr. Neville examined the arm it has been kept in preservation at the Ebury street Mortuary, and he suggests that by comparing the arm with the trunk it could be discovered without difficulty whether or not they were portions of the same person's body. The same also applies to the arm discovered in Lambeth. At King street and Scotland yard the police maintain their usual reticence. They assert that they know nothing except that a body has been found.

[Robert St Devil]

Another couple of questions about the Pinchin St. victim (only bc i,ve seen the term ,fetus, and ,abortion, mentioned recently).

1. Was the victim pregnant?
2. If so, would her pregnancy have been apparent, was ahe showing?
3. If she wasn,t at that stage of ,showing, how would her killer know she was pregnant?

Apologies if i,m stalling the thread

[jerryd]

Joshua,

If I'm not mistaken, Dr. Bond stated his opinion on death after examining the leg on the 17th of October. And he did give early September as an option. Six weeks prior to the 17th of October is around the 5th of September.

Morning Advertiser
23 October 1888

Mr. Bond, divisional surgeon, said, having examined the remains found on the 17th inst., he saw that they consisted of a leg and foot, which had undoubtedly been lying there several weeks. Decomposition had taken place on the spot, as the condition of the earth showed. On the following day Mr. Hepburn and witness again examined the leg, and found that it had been divided at the knee-joint, and very cleverly disarticulated so that the mains seemed to correspond with the other portions of the body found, and he had no doubt belonged to it. He was fully of opinion that the body had lain where it was for several weeks, and had decomposed there. The brickwork was saturated with decomposing fluid. He believed that death took place about the end of August or beginning of September. It was impossible that the appearances presented could have resulted from exposure for two or three days. The foot was very well shaped, and was that of a well-to-do person.

[Pcdunn]

The last sentence of the "Morning Advertiser" article of October 23, 1888, is interesting: "The foot was very well shaped, and was that of a well-to-do person."

How could this be determined?
-- Quality of the clothing (stocking?) or the shoe?
-- Or just a lack of rough skin, sunburn, or calluses on the bare foot?

[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,

I have not had the time to look at these "facts" yet, since other things are happening right now. But since you seem to think that Lechmere was the Torso killer (if there was such a person) and Jack the Ripper in one and the same person - have you got at least some source for each murder that connects him to the whole series of murders that you postulate, and if you have, which is the series of murders?

If you put together Jack the Ripper and the Torso killer the correct series could be:

Nichols - Chapman - Whitehall victim - Stride - Eddowes - Kelly - Jackson - Pinchin Street victim - McKenzie.

What is your suggestion?

Regards, Pierre

[jerryd]

Another couple of questions about the Pinchin St. victim (only bc i,ve seen the term ,fetus, and ,abortion, mentioned recently).

1. Was the victim pregnant?
2. If so, would her pregnancy have been apparent, was ahe showing?
3. If she wasn,t at that stage of ,showing, how would her killer know she was pregnant?

Apologies if i,m stalling the thread

Dr Phillips says;

London Evening News And Post September 24, 1889

The womb was an unimpregnated one and probably never had be impregnated.