torso maps

[Varqm]

You ARE joking? A lot of men "like" a woman´s heart and uterus (she only has the one)...?
Enough to cut them out?

If they were such popular trinkets, one would expect scores of examples of besotten men carrying them around in their pockets, but strangely this is not so. Instead, the practice has never produced simultaneously working serialists in the same town doing it. In fact, the ones who do it are incredibly rare. We need to respect that fact if we are to understand what we are working with.

A slit and a flap are very different matters, by the way. And you could not compare the flaps inbetween victims since it is not known how they were shaped. They were large and it seems they covered very substantial parts of the victims respective bodies until they were cut away, but apart from that, there is no real telling what they looked like.

I''m saying it's not surprising they would go after it in their "murder spree", arguably,agree?
As far as the rarity, the more important fact to me is there are too many kinds of people and they are unpredictable, that you won't know what 2 of those/them will do.It happened in East End/West End, there it is.And we are not sure yet if in the torso case they were taken only for the purpose of disposal.

In the Pinchin case what's the significance of John Arnold,why would somebody know in advance where a torso would be deposited? Why was
he not suspected? Does this not point to people were tasked to get rid of a body/torso and word spread out, so it was not a serial killing?

We need drawings otherwise it's unclear.

--

[Fisherman]

If I guess it will you admit?

Most likely no.

[Abby Normal]

What I have had in mind the last year or two. It is not a ritual with ceremonies, trumpets, secret signs and such, but the behaviour of the killer borders on the ritualistic. That´s all I am ready to say, so nothing´s changed in that department.

If I guess it will you admit?

[Fisherman]

Flaps,slips,slits are all vague,words and it's usage could easily be vague ,one could just go round and round, how about a drawing of the torso victim's bodies,then we could compare it to the rippers victims.Only a visual would make it clear.

Doesn't a lot of men like a woman's heart and uteri,at least mentally,and it's not surprising at all that 2 people did.

---

You ARE joking? A lot of men "like" a woman´s heart and uterus (she only has the one)...?
Enough to cut them out?

If they were such popular trinkets, one would expect scores of examples of besotten men carrying them around in their pockets, but strangely this is not so. Instead, the practice has never produced simultaneously working serialists in the same town doing it. In fact, the ones who do it are incredibly rare. We need to respect that fact if we are to understand what we are working with.

A slit and a flap are very different matters, by the way. And you could not compare the flaps inbetween victims since it is not known how they were shaped. They were large and it seems they covered very substantial parts of the victims respective bodies until they were cut away, but apart from that, there is no real telling what they looked like.

[Varqm]

Flaps,slips,slits are all vague,words and it's usage could easily be vague ,one could just go round and round, how about a drawing of the torso victim's bodies,then we could compare it to the rippers victims.Only a visual would make it clear.

Doesn't a lot of men like a woman's heart and uteri,at least mentally,and it's not surprising at all that 2 people did.

---

[Fisherman]

hi fish




what ritual between the two do you have in mind?

What I have had in mind the last year or two. It is not a ritual with ceremonies, trumpets, secret signs and such, but the behaviour of the killer borders on the ritualistic. That´s all I am ready to say, so nothing´s changed in that department.

[Abby Normal]

If there was copycatting involved, then BOTH men copycatted each other - the torso killer took over the abdominal wall cutting and the Ripper latched on to the taking of the heart, for example. Much as just about nothing on planet Earth is impossible, I find such a thing very hard to believe.

As for the nosetips and the kidney, I don´t tell them apart when it comes to the reason for them going lost - I believe they were examples of the same agenda, and it all borders on the ritualistic, as far as I´m concerned. The key comparison - and I have said this before - is Kelly and the 1873 victim. That is the clearest couple in terms of visualising the agenda I am thinking of. I am still waiting for somebody else to make the same observations!

I agree that the Ripper seems less into changing paths and exploring, but I think that owes to the different conditions offered - no "slab", no saw, no much time to use. Once again, I view the Ripper killings as "Torso murders light", the field version if you like. And there WERE differences, albeit not as many and as clear.

hi fish

As for the nosetips and the kidney, I don´t tell them apart when it comes to the reason for them going lost - I believe they were examples of the same agenda, and it all borders on the ritualistic, as far as I´m concerned. The key comparison - and I have said this before - is Kelly and the 1873 victim. That is the clearest couple in terms of visualising the agenda I am thinking of. I am still waiting for somebody else to make the same observations!

what ritual between the two do you have in mind?

[Fisherman]

I don’t see it as a massive coincidence, Christer, as I think the Ripper may very well have been inspired/influenced by Torso Man and vice versa. Like I’ve suggested before, it was not until after Kelly that a torso victim turned up with her abdomen cut open in 2 pieces and the uterus cut out through the opening and that one appeared on the fringes of 'Ripper territory'.
I didn’t mean to imply that everything the Ripper did must have been directed at parts he found sexually interesting. He did everything ‘by the book’, if you will: he slashed & cut those parts of a woman that might be considered appealing to a man, he eviscerated and he cut the face, which may also just have been about obliterating the identity in the sense of diminishing the victim as a person. I think cutting off the tip of the nose was just part of cutting the face without having any other deeper meaning. I view the taking of the kidney as ritualistic.
I agree with this. The thing is that I don’t see this with the Ripper; he is quite consistent.
Likewise, Christer.

If there was copycatting involved, then BOTH men copycatted each other - the torso killer took over the abdominal wall cutting and the Ripper latched on to the taking of the heart, for example. Much as just about nothing on planet Earth is impossible, I find such a thing very hard to believe.

As for the nosetips and the kidney, I don´t tell them apart when it comes to the reason for them going lost - I believe they were examples of the same agenda, and it all borders on the ritualistic, as far as I´m concerned. The key comparison - and I have said this before - is Kelly and the 1873 victim. That is the clearest couple in terms of visualising the agenda I am thinking of. I am still waiting for somebody else to make the same observations!

I agree that the Ripper seems less into changing paths and exploring, but I think that owes to the different conditions offered - no "slab", no saw, no much time to use. Once again, I view the Ripper killings as "Torso murders light", the field version if you like. And there WERE differences, albeit not as many and as clear.

[Abby Normal]

I don’t see it as a massive coincidence, Christer, as I think the Ripper may very well have been inspired/influenced by Torso Man and vice versa. Like I’ve suggested before, it was not until after Kelly that a torso victim turned up with her abdomen cut open in 2 pieces and the uterus cut out through the opening and that one appeared on the fringes of 'Ripper territory'.
I didn’t mean to imply that everything the Ripper did must have been directed at parts he found sexually interesting. He did everything ‘by the book’, if you will: he slashed & cut those parts of a woman that might be considered appealing to a man, he eviscerated and he cut the face, which may also just have been about obliterating the identity in the sense of diminishing the victim as a person. I think cutting off the tip of the nose was just part of cutting the face without having any other deeper meaning. I view the taking of the kidney as ritualistic.
I agree with this. The thing is that I don’t see this with the Ripper; he is quite consistent.
Likewise, Christer.

Hi Franko

I don’t see it as a massive coincidence, Christer, as I think the Ripper may very well have been inspired/influenced by Torso Man and vice versa. Like I’ve suggested before, it was not until after Kelly that a torso victim turned up with her abdomen cut open in 2 pieces and the uterus cut out through the opening and that one appeared on the fringes of 'Ripper territory'.

Hi Frank
You know ive seen this mentioned before by others too-but I just don't see it.
I don't think in the history of serial killers that two concurrent separate killers are influenced by each other. similarily the idea of a copy cat-to the extent that one killer tries to make the wounds/crime scene look like the work of another known killer to throw off suspicion-is also non existant as far as I know. Its an intriguing idea, but history just dosnt bear it out.


now, I lean toward one man for both, but if it was two men involved, I think they were completely separate and not really following (or trying to out do) each other or as Jerry Dunlop has posited- the torsoripper was two men working together to commit the series of murders. Now that does have precedent in serial killer history.

[FrankO]

I´m fine with disagreeing with you, Frank. To me, the similarities cannot be subordiante to the differences. You see it differently, and are willing to allow for a massive coincidence.

I don’t see it as a massive coincidence, Christer, as I think the Ripper may very well have been inspired/influenced by Torso Man and vice versa. Like I’ve suggested before, it was not until after Kelly that a torso victim turned up with her abdomen cut open in 2 pieces and the uterus cut out through the opening and that one appeared on the fringes of 'Ripper territory'.

I fail to see how nosetips and kidneys can have been cut away for sexual reasons, other than if we look at sexuality as 100 per cent control-driven. In such a case, ALL parts of the human body can have sexual implications.
I don´t think they did. I think that they were used as props, more or less, answering to a ritualistic behaviour coupled to his inspiration.

I didn’t mean to imply that everything the Ripper did must have been directed at parts he found sexually interesting. He did everything ‘by the book’, if you will: he slashed & cut those parts of a woman that might be considered appealing to a man, he eviscerated and he cut the face, which may also just have been about obliterating the identity in the sense of diminishing the victim as a person. I think cutting off the tip of the nose was just part of cutting the face without having any other deeper meaning. I view the taking of the kidney as ritualistic.

Also note how the Rainham victim and Jackson differ - Jackson had the sternum opened up, and so we have a different access to the heart opened up in that case. It tallies quite well with how the killer may have been exploring different avenues for his work. The Whitehall victim had no such damage at all, and the heart was not taken. If it was an urge on his behalf, why?
Because it was one of many ways in which he could answer up to the agenda set by the inspiration ground from which he worked, I say. There was never any absolute need to take out the heart, the uterus, the kidney, the liver etc - but each and every such matter was nevertheless an exponent of the agenda he was working to. As far as I´m concerned, he could just as well have taken out the brain, the spleen and the femur bones and he would still be the same killer with the same overall intentions.

I agree with this. The thing is that I don’t see this with the Ripper; he is quite consistent.

Thanks for the exchange so far, Frank!

Likewise, Christer.

[Abby Normal]

And all the while, one solution will always remain more likely than the others, as long as there are similarities involved the way there is here.

Always look for simplicity, and you will be well prepared.

You know i kind of agree with this. I dont know what if its occams razor or what , but the simplist solution is that it was one man.

[Abby Normal]

Some believe in Torsoripper, some believe the two were separate, some believe there were multiple Rippers.

We're running the gamut in this thread.

Some beleieve the torsoripper were two men working tigether, some beleive there were multiple torsomen, some beleive the torso victims werent even murdered. Pretty crazy.

[Fisherman]

Some believe in Torsoripper, some believe the two were separate, some believe there were multiple Rippers.

We're running the gamut in this thread.

And all the while, one solution will always remain more likely than the others, as long as there are similarities involved the way there is here.

Always look for simplicity, and you will be well prepared.

[Harry D]

I believe Rocky that, almost certainly, the first 2 Canonical murders were done by the same lone killer. And that he killed because he was mentally ill,.. in his delusions the abdomen the of the female played a great role.

There may be one more murder I would associate with that same killer within the Canonical Group, which would make the total by one person for reasons of madness a series of 3. The bare minimum kills to even call this a series.

I think the motives for 2 or 3 of the other Canonicals are rooted within what is already known about them, and the people around them.

I think one murder might have at least tangential connection with the Parnell Commission as well....since you asked.

Some believe in Torsoripper, some believe the two were separate, some believe there were multiple Rippers.

We're running the gamut in this thread.

[Fisherman]

"And you tell us that the journalists, all of them, were not telling the truth about what they saw! Supposedly, they saw"

I said no such thing, ever. And I certainly never even implied, never mind said, that the pieces of flesh were "spaghetti thin". Does your instinct to exaggerate and misrepresent know no bounds?

That apart, what makes you think that the journalists actually saw these accursed "flaps or any of the remains, for themselves?

You very clearly stated that the journalists were misreporting as far as you could tell. Is that not so? If you instead accept that they were in all probability correct in their descriptions, I´m fine with that!

"Spaghetti thin" was caricaturing your fundamentalist take: The thinner, the better! I feel quite certain that you are very well aware of this.

The journalists either saw the flaps or had them described by somebody who had absolutely no reason to lie or exaggerate about them.

And please do not speak of me misrepresenting. You are the one who consciously leaves out how Hebbert said "large flaps", for example, opting for a description you assure is correct by means of dictionary reading. That invites caricatures.

So please!

Question: Is it possible to describe a shape of 40 x 10-12 centimeters as a "slip"? Or is it something that nobody would ever do? Or something that anybody but Hebbert would do?