torso maps

[Fisherman]

It may not have been have been as crudely cut up as Gordon claims. If we have a lunatic running around in London dismembering and then a body turns up in Paris dismembered too in the middle of that killing, which to my mind is similar and then people claim that that dismemberment couldn't possibly have anything to do with the dismemberments in London but say that other murders by a killer with a different M.O. were done by the same hand then I would conclude that this is a very strange way of thinking.

Ah! Now I see what you are after. Well, to me, the distance in combination with the character of the deed rules out the Paris torso.

If we look at the torso killings only, they are of differing character, all of them - to a degree. A torso dumped on land and with no eviscerations differs a lot from one dumped in the river and having organs taken out. But the connecting factor was always there in the handiwork of the killer. It is like handwriting, to a degree - and this killer had a very deviating handiwork, cutting meticulously and quickly at the same time, requiring a lot of skill.

He also cut out uteri and hearts and he cut away the abdominal wall in flaps from a victim. That too qualifies as a distinct and quite, quite rare handwriting. And there were Ripper victims carrying his signature too. Plus it was siad that the Ripper was a skilful cutter too, in spite of the much cruder conditions he probably worked under.

As I keep saying, differences, even large such ones, go away if there are rare enough similarities.

There are.

[John Wheat]

Which are the hallmarks of the London torsos, John? To your mind? Having had limbs cut off?
If they are cut off in different ways, that marker is not a useful one.

Geographical distances must always be looked upon as dividers in these cases. To bridge such a gap, it takes more than dismemberment. The Salamanca Place torso was obviously not the work of the torso killer, owing to how it was crudely cut up. If we have another crudely cut body on the other side of the English Channel, that lowers the probability of a connection even further. Uterus removal or not.

I fail to see the viability of the argument you make about how failing to recognize the Paris torso as the work of the Torso killer of London would diminish the likelihood that the Torso killer and the Ripper were one and the same. It makes no sense to me at all, but maybe either I misunderstood you or you worded it in a way that made it incomprehensible to me.

It may not have been have been as crudely cut up as Gordon claims. If we have a lunatic running around in London dismembering and then a body turns up in Paris dismembered too in the middle of that killing, which to my mind is similar and then people claim that that dismemberment couldn't possibly have anything to do with the dismemberments in London but say that other murders by a killer with a different M.O. were done by the same hand then I would conclude that this is a very strange way of thinking.

[Fisherman]

He didn't have to reach Pinchin Street, if someone else living in the East End independently happened to hit upon the highly original (not!!!) idea of choppiing up a body and dumping it.

Any idea why that somebody just happened to be cutting in the same fashion as the torso killer, Gareth? Disarticulating as skilfully, and leaving an impression on Hebbert that it was "in all similar" to the other torso murders?

You seem to think it was commonplace to dismember bodies and dump them in London. What do you base that on? Is it a new addition to the efforts to try and nullify the Pinchin Street victim; in the East End, people had to climb over dismembered people to pass through the streets?
Some little verification of that view would be of the essence for your argument.

Pinchin Street. That really seems to nag you.

As I said, the distance to Pinchin Street from Battersea Park is more or less the same as from Battersea Park to St Pancras lock. If he could do one of those trips, then why could he not do the other? If, that is, he actually did travel from Battersea.
That remains an unknown factor.

[RockySullivan]

And not one head was ever found, do you not think that is a significant factor.?

Were the removal of the heads to hide the identity, if it was for what purpose, why would a serial killer want to hide the identity of a down and out female he had just murdered, and if there were a serial killer why would he go to all that trouble to dismember a body, when it could have simply have been dumped anywhere in the dead of night had and all.

The WM killed his victims where he met them, so no positive comparisons there with the torsos.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

why hide the identity of someone you just murdered, when they could have been seen going to where they were murdered and that location very well might be connected to you? And the description of the whitehall victims hands dont describe someone down and out necessarily.

[Sam Flynn]

If he was unable to reach Pinchin Street, I fail to see how he could ever hope to get to Paris.

He didn't have to reach Pinchin Street, if someone else living in the East End independently happened to hit upon the highly original (not!!!) idea of chopping up a body and dumping it.

[Fisherman]

I wouldn't trust what Michael Gordon claims. And it bears all the hallmarks of the torso victims of London so as I've stated if people are unwilling to count it as a victim of the Torso Killer then it puts a major problem in the Torso Killer also being Jack theory.

Which are the hallmarks of the London torsos, John? To your mind? Having had limbs cut off?
If they are cut off in different ways, that marker is not a useful one.

Geographical distances must always be looked upon as dividers in these cases. To bridge such a gap, it takes more than dismemberment. The Salamanca Place torso was obviously not the work of the torso killer, owing to how it was crudely cut up. If we have another crudely cut body on the other side of the English Channel, that lowers the probability of a connection even further. Uterus removal or not.

I fail to see the viability of the argument you make about how failing to recognize the Paris torso as the work of the Torso killer of London would diminish the likelihood that the Torso killer and the Ripper were one and the same. It makes no sense to me at all, but maybe either I misunderstood you or you worded it in a way that made it incomprehensible to me.

[Fisherman]

I've never said he was unable too reach Pinchin Street. But if people are saying the Paris Torso Victim was not by the Torso killer. Which had it's right arm and legs cut off and removed. Also the right breast and uterus were removed and were missing as was the head. Then there is a problem with linking the Torso Murders to the Ripper murders as an almost identical victim was found in Paris in 1886.

I was not pointing a finger at you when I spoke about the long and troublesome journey from Battersea to Pinchin Street.

As I said, the torso was reportedly crudely cut up, and that effectively means that it had probably no connection at all with the London torsos that were very skilfully cut up and dismembered.

Even if the Paris torso was connected to the London dittos, I fail to see how that disenables a link between the torso killer and the Ripper.

[Herlock Sholmes]

hi HS
its an affectionate (supposed to be funny) way of someone who really dosnt want someone to leave but trying to be cavalier about it.


Its now a cliché here in the states-its from the movie Stripes and Bill Murray says it to his girlfriend when she tells him shes leaving.

Then I apologise for misunderstanding it of course. Take care Abby

[John Wheat]

If he was unable to reach Pinchin Street, I fail to see how he could ever hope to get to Paris.

You actually asked about the Paris torso back in 2016 too - and I answered that Michael Gordon claims in his book that this torso was crudely cut up, meaning that it clearly seems to be a different hand at work.

I wouldn't trust what Michael Gordon claims. And it bears all the hallmarks of the torso victims of London so as I've stated if people are unwilling to count it as a victim of the Torso Killer then it puts a major problem in the Torso Killer also being Jack theory.

[John Wheat]

If he was unable to reach Pinchin Street, I fail to see how he could ever hope to get to Paris.

I've never said he was unable too reach Pinchin Street. But if people are saying the Paris Torso Victim was not by the Torso killer. Which had it's right arm and legs cut off and removed. Also the right breast and uterus were removed and were missing as was the head. Then there is a problem with linking the Torso Murders to the Ripper murders as an almost identical victim was found in Paris in 1886.

[Fisherman]

Just out of interest are people saying the Paris Torso found in November 1886 was also a victim of the Torso Killer because that bears much more similarity to the Torso Victims than any of the Ripper's victims do?

If he was unable to reach Pinchin Street, I fail to see how he could ever hope to get to Paris.

You actually asked about the Paris torso back in 2016 too - and I answered that Michael Gordon claims in his book that this torso was crudely cut up, meaning that it clearly seems to be a different hand at work.

[John Wheat]

Paris Torso

Just out of interest are people saying the Paris Torso found in November 1886 was also a victim of the Torso Killer because that bears much more similarity to the Torso Victims than any of the Ripper's victims do?

[Fisherman]

Cheers Fish,
Yeah, you've been getting pelters, best not make it worse by postulating 2 killers.

Good luck with your research

Thanks!

I really don´t feel I´ve been peltered - it´s more like a number of posters have flung themselves voluntarily head first into brick walls. Suicidal, more or less.

Me, I´m fine.

[barnflatwyngarde]

There were traces from Hamilton found on the clothes of the victims, possibly semen. He died before the case could be pursued, though.

I have one killer and one killer only for the torso murders. AND the Ripper murders. And the Pinchin Street victim is included there...

I am economical in that sense.

The kind of ritualistically coloured background and inspiration drive I believe to be there is not something that a killer is likely to share with somebody else. If there was a second participator, then my best bet is that he or she was forced into it by the real killer - but I see no indication whatsoever that there were two torso killers.

Cheers Fish,
Yeah, you've been getting pelters, best not make it worse by postulating 2 killers.

Good luck with your research

[Fisherman]

hi HS
its an affectionate (supposed to be funny) way of someone who really dosnt want someone to leave but trying to be cavalier about it.


Its now a cliché here in the states-its from the movie Stripes and Bill Murray says it to his girlfriend when she tells him shes leaving.

One can´t help feeling that it is a tad ironic that poor Herlock, who says I failed to pick up on how his comment about Scandinavian teeth grinding was a joke has now fallen prey to misunderstanding what even I realized was a joke.

Maybe he didn´t see the movie.

Bill Murray. Got to love him.