torso maps

[Fisherman]

Yes but not being there at the time we don't know how similar the flaps were.

Exactly so, John. We only have the basic fact that Chapman and Kelly - who both had their uteri cut out - had large parts of their abdominal walls cut away in what was described as flaps. And we also know that Liz Jackson - who had her uterus cut out - had large parts of her abdominal wall cut away in what was described as flaps.

So much as there may have been differences in the apparitions of said respective flaps, we cannot possibly claim to know that this was so. As I say, if the flaps had all been of a very similar and specific design, then the game would have been up 130 years ago, so reasonably the flaps were not so similar and specific in design as to make the deduction of a single originator inavoidable.

However, since the flaps are added to other traits (cut out uteri, cut out hearts, opening of the abdomen all the way down, no physical torture evident, prostituted victims etc.), and since cutting the abdominal wall away is something that is rare in the extreme, and since there is no evidence of any other case where two eviscerating serial killers operated on the same general ground at the same general time, the conclusion can only be one: there was just the one killer.

[Fisherman]

I’ve never said that it’s a fact Fish. The massive differences make it more probable that there were two killers for me. I’m not the one that takes the ‘you must be ignorant or biased’ to hold this opinion.

I´m sorry, but to work from the idea that two series of murders that produced so many and rare similarities are not the work of the same killer, is to be in conflict with the evidence. For whatever reason. You are free to pick your own terms, but it remains that it cannot be more likely with two killers then just the one. It is actually vastly less likely.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Exactly so, John. We only have the basic fact that Chapman and Kelly - who both had their uteri cut out - had large parts of their abdominal walls cut away in what was described as flaps. And we also know that Liz Jackson - who had her uterus cut out - had large parts of her abdominal wall cut away in what was described as flaps.

So much as there may have been differences in the apparitions of said respective flaps, we cannot possibly claim to know that this was so. As I say, if the flaps had all been of a very similar and specific design, then the game would have been up 130 years ago, so reasonably the flaps were not so similar and specific in design as to make the deduction of a single originator inavoidable.

However, since the flaps are added to other traits (cut out uteri, cut out hearts, opening of the abdomen all the way down, no physical torture evident, prostituted victims etc.), and since cutting the abdominal wall away is something that is rare in the extreme, and since there is no evidence of any other case where two eviscerating serial killers operated on the same general ground at the same general time, the conclusion can only be one: there was just the one killer.

No.

After cautioning against certainty in an earlier post you then propose your conclusion as a statement of fact. It’s definitely not a fact. Its your interpretation of the known evidence.

[Sam Flynn]

Flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits.... and so on ad nauseam.

NONE of the above are specific, technical terms, for God's sake!

[Sam Flynn]

"However, since the flaps are added to other traits - cut out uteri, cut out hearts, opening of the abdomen all the way down"

Jesus wept! Pinchin Street torso's abdomen was not "opened"; The uterus was removed once - and it had a bloody BABY inside it; the heart was removed TOGETHER WITH THE LUNGS, from ONE torso victim - the one who'd been segmented across the thorax. etc etc

no physical torture evident

What's that supposed to signify? There was no ice-cream present, and no badger-hairs, either.

prostituted victims

So Peter Sutcliffe was the Torso Killer, was he? Assuming all the victims were prostitutes - WHICH WE DON'T KNOW.

God preserve us from such loose thinking! Mummy, please make it stop!

[Herlock Sholmes]

Exactly Gareth. Of the five ‘traits’ that Fish adds to ‘evidence’ of the flaps 2 of them can be dismissed out of hand. Indeed, as you pointed out, why was ‘torture’ added in the first place if not as padding? Flaps should also be dismissed (but it won’t be).

[Herlock Sholmes]

So much as there may have been differences in the apparitions of said respective flaps, we cannot possibly claim to know that this was so. As I say, if the flaps had all been of a very similar and specific design, then the game would have been up 130 years ago, so reasonably the flaps were not so similar and specific in design as to make the deduction of a single originator inavoidable.

However, since the flaps are added to other traits (cut out uteri, cut out hearts, opening of the abdomen all the way down, no physical torture evident, prostituted victims etc.), and since cutting the abdominal wall away is something that is rare in the extreme, and since there is no evidence of any other case where two eviscerating serial killers operated on the same general ground at the same general time, the conclusion can only be one: there was just the one killer. N

The above two paragraphs do not constitute a reasonable statement Fish. You can’t, on one hand, admit that we have no reason to ‘connect’ the flaps across the two cases and then say, because there is other evidence, they become significant again. The sentence that I’ve emboldened is the statement that should stand alone.

[Fisherman]

No.

After cautioning against certainty in an earlier post you then propose your conclusion as a statement of fact. It’s definitely not a fact. Its your interpretation of the known evidence.

I keep saying that there is always the outside possibility of two killers - but that is a totally outside possibility. The facts of the case encourage us to conclude that there was just one killer. The fact that some disagree is in line with Ripperology overall; weird and untenable cases will be made at times.

Sorry, but there you are. In our case, the one killer scenario outweighs the two man ditto in a very massive way.

I´m all for not laying things down as facts when they cannot be so. But I am equally for admitting that we are very close to certainty in this errand.

[Fisherman]

Flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits, flaps, slips, pieces, slabs, portions, strips, bits.... and so on ad nauseam.

NONE of the above are specific, technical terms, for God's sake!

That´s quite an effort, Gareth. You would have made yor point by saying "flaps is not a technical term".
I think we all agree that the abdominal walls of Chapman, Kelly and Jackson were taken away in sections, leaving much of the abdomen open. Technical terms or not, that is what we are faced with.

Unless you are suggesting that what was described as flaps in all three cases was something entirely different from case to case?

[Fisherman]

"However, since the flaps are added to other traits - cut out uteri, cut out hearts, opening of the abdomen all the way down"

Jesus wept! Pinchin Street torso's abdomen was not "opened"; The uterus was removed once - and it had a bloody BABY inside it; the heart was removed TOGETHER WITH THE LUNGS, from ONE torso victim - the one who'd been segmented across the thorax. etc etc
What's that supposed to signify? There was no ice-cream present, and no badger-hairs, either.
So Peter Sutcliffe was the Torso Killer, was he? Assuming all the victims were prostitutes - WHICH WE DON'T KNOW.

God preserve us from such loose thinking! Mummy, please make it stop!

1. It matters not that the Pinchin Street torso was not opened (but for the vagina), since other victims of the torso killer were. You seem to think that all murders must be perfect copies to count as comparable, but that is not so. Once you have cut a woman open, you have confessed to that orientation as being one of the possible traits of your work.

2. The absense of physical torture marks signifies that neither of these killers were into that very common custom. Especially those who abduct women (as the torso killer may have done) are often prone to torture their victims. But in these two cases, we have a further reason to accept a common originator since this parameter too is in line with the suggestion.

3. No, Peter Sutcliffe was not the Torso killer. Nobody has suggested it, and you are making rather a spectacle of yourself for suggesting it.

[Fisherman]

The above two paragraphs do not constitute a reasonable statement Fish. You can’t, on one hand, admit that we have no reason to ‘connect’ the flaps across the two cases and then say, because there is other evidence, they become significant again. The sentence that I’ve emboldened is the statement that should stand alone.

I think you may miss the whole point. I am saying that if the flaps had been specifically shaped and shaped in the same way in all three cases - like for example having the shape of an elephant - then the police would not have missed out on it´s relevance.

You would perhaps have said that it was just a coincidence, but rationally reasoning people would not.

It therefore takes flaps that were not so similarly shaped for the police to have allowed for the possibility of two killers. However, they would have based that possibility on how they did not realize how dismemberent can be of an aggressive nature, satisfying the dismemberer per se. They apparently believed that dismemberment was a practicality only.

Cutting away the abdominal wall in flaps is so specific and odd a deed that it clearly signals a common perp if the cases occur in the same area and time. That stands.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I keep saying that there is always the outside possibility of two killers - but that is a totally outside possibility. The facts of the case encourage us to conclude that there was just one killer. The fact that some disagree is in line with Ripperology overall; weird and untenable cases will be made at times.

Sorry, but there you are. In our case, the one killer scenario outweighs the two man ditto in a very massive way.

I´m all for not laying things down as facts when they cannot be so. But I am equally for admitting that we are very close to certainty in this errand.

We’re not even in the same country as certainty. This is wish-thinking-pure and simple. The massive differences tend us toward 2 killers.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I think you may miss the whole point. I am saying that if the flaps had been specifically shaped and shaped in the same way in all three cases - like for example having the shape of an elephant - then the police would not have missed out on it´s relevance.

You would perhaps have said that it was just a coincidence, but rationally reasoning people would not.

It therefore takes flaps that were not so similarly shaped for the police to have allowed for the possibility of two killers. However, they would have based that possibility on how they did not realize how dismemberent can be of an aggressive nature, satisfying the dismemberer per se. They apparently believed that dismemberment was a practicality only.

Cutting away the abdominal wall in flaps is so specific and odd a deed that it clearly signals a common perp if the cases occur in the same area and time. That stands.

It stands in Fish world. There is nothing specific about flaps. How can you be sure that some of the flaps weren’t just collateral damage? How do you know that the dismemberment wasn’t done for practical reasons? (The way the bodies were disposed of appears to indicate that.) The phrase ‘in the same area’ is deliberately misleading as it ignores the fact that the rippers victims were killed within a few streets of each other whereas TK was largely in a different part of a very large city. We know that all the rippers victims were prostitutes but we can have no such certainty with TK.

There’s way too much doubt here for anything approaching certainty.

[Fisherman]

We’re not even in the same country as certainty. This is wish-thinking-pure and simple. The massive differences tend us toward 2 killers.

Any difference, no matter how large or small it is, will always speak in favour of two killers - to a degree. Sometimes it will do so clearly (one killed by knife, one by gun), other times it will not do so very clearly at all, instead opening up for one killer (the pinky sawed off on one victim, the thumb on another).

That is how differences work and what they can do for an investigation.

Once similarities occur, they carry a lot more weight than the dissimilarities, generally speaking (if one victim dies in the east of London and another in the west of London, that would seem to speak for two killers. But if the victims both have had their abdominal walls taken away in sections, the difference immediately becomes subordinate to the similarity - it becomes much more likely with a killer travelling some distance than with a coincidental taking away of the abdomen in the two cases).

The more similarities there are and the rarer they are, the lesser the chance of two killers. When we have examples of abdomens cut open from sternum to groin, we have a very, very rare thing. In itself, it points very clearly to one killer. Once organs are taken out, we are dealing with a type of crime that occurs only very rarely. When both these parameters are present, they reinforce one another - they become confirmations of the one killer scenario being the by far most likely one. If we then add something like the abdominal wall being cut away, then the differences we have become totally weightless when it comes to making the call of one or two killers. We have one killer only - and he sometimes dismembered, while he did not do so on other occasions. For whatever reason, this killer went berserk on the streets of East London in 1888, killing out in the open streets. All the while, though, he kept to the pattern of killing and then moving on to disassembling his victims immediately after that; there was muscle contraction in the torso cases telling us that this was so. It was not the average dismemberment killer at work, hesitating in the longest to go about the gruesome cutting. It was somebody who killed to enable the cutting phase, and who seemingly came for that part.

The question of the number of killers is a done deal since the evidence leaves us in no doubt. We either are dealing with a set of incredible, unparalleled coincidences - or we are dealing with no coincidences at all. The case is either the strangest case ever - or completely straightforward.

Let that sink in, and welcome back afterwards.

[Fisherman]

It stands in Fish world. There is nothing specific about flaps. How can you be sure that some of the flaps weren’t just collateral damage? How do you know that the dismemberment wasn’t done for practical reasons? (The way the bodies were disposed of appears to indicate that.) The phrase ‘in the same area’ is deliberately misleading as it ignores the fact that the rippers victims were killed within a few streets of each other whereas TK was largely in a different part of a very large city. We know that all the rippers victims were prostitutes but we can have no such certainty with TK.

There’s way too much doubt here for anything approaching certainty.

I can´t be sure that the flaps were not collateral damage. But I can be sure that if that was the case, then not only did the killer produce one such large flap, but instead two in Jacksons case, three in Kellys and four in Chapmans.

Were they ALL "collateral damage"? Isn´t it indicative of a wish to remove the abdominal wall if it is done in two or more sections, Herlock?

I can´t be sure that the dismemberment wasn´t done for practical reasons. But I can be sure that such dismemberments normally involve dumping on one site only and trying to conceal the parts. Once parts turn up in a police building and are floated down a stream that gives them up, year out an year in, it tends to point to a killer who was not interested in hiding what he did - on the contrary.

As for geography, we don´t know where the torso killer picked up and killed his victims (how many times must I say that before it sinks in?), but overall, what is needed to allow for a single killer is that the distances between the murder and dumping sites allow for just the one man. And they do so with the greatest of ease.