torso maps

[RockySullivan]

Firstly, you are making the prior claim, ie that the ripper and TK were one and the same, therefore the burden of proof is on you.

Secondly, for something to be possible why does it have to have occurred before?

Another failure of logic.

Because the simplest conclusion is that the murders are related. It's even reflected in the headlines of the day. "Horribly Mutilated Another Victim of Jack the Ripper in the East End" (Pinchin st torso http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/a...orums/tor1.jpg)

Take it step by step, how do you explain the 15 inch incision up the abdomen of the Pinchin st torso?

[Sam Flynn]

The Ripper was an eviscerating serial killer, TK was a killer who removed heads and limbs but OCCASIONALLY eviscerated.

[Sam Flynn]

"The idea that two serial killers, who were both active in 1888 and both left body/body parts in whitechapel (both with victims a giant incision up the center of the abdomen)"

The Pinchin torso's abdominal wound was superficial, and did not open the abdominal cavity.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Because the simplest conclusion is that the murders are related. It's even reflected in the headlines of the day. "Horribly Mutilated Another Victim of Jack the Ripper in the East End" (Pinchin st torso http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/a...orums/tor1.jpg)

Take it step by step, how do you explain the 15 inch incision up the abdomen of the Pinchin st torso?

An incision that existed. I don’t seek to explain it. We cannot know what the killer was thinking at the time that it occurred.

[John Wheat]

The Ripper was an eviscerating serial killer, TK was a killer who removed heads and limbs but OCCASIONALLY eviscerated.

Exactly Sam. The idea that The Ripper and The Torso Killer were one and the same with similar M.O.'s is a non starter. Add the fact that not all of The murders leading up to the canon's in 1888 were likely committed by The Ripper. Also no proponent of the Torso Killer and The Ripper being one and the same has to my knowledge mentioned the Paris Torso murder from November 1886 which has much more in common with the Torso Murders than any Ripper murder. The woman's Torso had the head, arms and legs cut off and removed. The right breast and uterus were removed and missing and the head was never found.

[Harry D]

Hi hs

IMHO it dosnt of course.

But surely you can see the point-there are no eviscerating (id even broaden that to post mortem mutilator) serial killers prior to torso and ripper... then all of a sudden there is two.

Again for me at least its just too much of yet another coincidence.

And like you said, Abby, both series appear to terminate in 1889. There wasn't another "Ripper-esque" murder in Whitechapel, and the 1902 Lambeth torso was never linked to the Thames Torsos

[Sam Flynn]

An incision that existed. I don’t seek to explain it. We cannot know what the killer was thinking at the time that it occurred.

It was superficial anyway. I find it very hard to believe that a true evisceration serial killer wouldn't have "followed through" with the knife to get at the innards.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi hs

IMHO it dosnt of course.

But surely you can see the point-there are no eviscerating (id even broaden that to post mortem mutilator) serial killers prior to torso and ripper... then all of a sudden there is two.

Again for me at least its just too much of yet another coincidence.

As you know Abby I’ve never been impressed with the ‘well it’s never happened before argument.’

Scenario.

2 series of murders occur in the year 2018. Reasonable proximity. Reasonably close time frame. Widely different mo’s. Some similarities.

One group of people say - connected, another group says - unconnected.

If we say that Jack and TK were one and the same and one group says. ‘Has this ever occurred before?’ To which someone responded by mentioning Jack and TK. Does that fact, in itself, make it any likelier that the 2 x 2118 series were connected?

My answer would be - not really.

Question:

Has every series of murders (of any number of victims) in the history of crime been examined in minute detail for any ‘connections?’ We all know that the answer to that is a categorical no as it would be a mammoth, lifelong undertaking for a large group of people working together checking all crimes in small out of the way towns that never made it into books or even the worldwide public domain. So there has to be at least a possibility that something similar might have occurred before but it just hasn’t been discovered yet (and probably never will.)

[Harry D]

Two serial killers who dabbled in evisceration/dehumanisation/organ removal overlapping in the same city at the same time is practically unprecedented. I don't think anyone is driven to say that such a coincidence is impossible, but the chances of that happening are incredibly remote.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Two serial killers who dabbled in evisceration/dehumanisation/organ removal overlapping in the same city at the same time is practically unprecedented. I don't think anyone is driven to say that such a coincidence is impossible, but the chances of that happening are incredibly remote.

I don’t think that they are anything like remote Harry because I, and many others, think that it did happen (and of course we could be wrong). If in time we found proof that they were different killers, and we surely have to accept at least the possibility, then at some time in the future someone might use these murders as a precedent. Would anyone at that point say, well I don’t accept the evidence that they were committed by one killer because they had no precedent?

All I’m saying is that we need far more than ‘precedence’ to make a strong case.

[Sam Flynn]

Two serial killers who dabbled in evisceration/dehumanisation/organ removal overlapping in the same city at the same time is practically unprecedented.

The Torso Killer did NOT eviscerate consistently, and when he/they did, there are clear and plausible reasons why he did so. Therefore, to classify him/them an "evisceration killer" is a huge exaggeration.

Organ removal and evisceration is the same thing, so that doesn't count as two criteria. Likewise "dehumanisation" is a subjective judgement, so that can't count as a criterion either.

In the interests of accuracy, "same city" should read "mostly on the opposite sides of a densely-populated city", and "same time" should read "same decade" to more accurately reflect the nature of the timescales we're dealing with. "Same decade" doesn't sound quite so good, though, does it?

And if we MUST pile up the criteria to make the argument look more substantial than it actually is, why leave out "dismemberment"? Oh, that's right, we can't, because - with ONE solitary exception, who differed from the other Torso cases in some key aspects - dismemberment didn't feature at all in the small area of the East End where the canonical Ripper murders happened.

I don't think anyone is driven to say that such a coincidence is impossible, but the chances of that happening are incredibly remote.

There are major dissimilarities and, even if there weren't, the thing about rare phenomena is that they sometimes can, and do, coincide. Precedents can, and do, happen.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The Torso Killer did NOT eviscerate consistently, and when he/they did, there are clear and plausible reasons why he did so. Therefore, to classify him/them an "evisceration killer" is a huge exaggeration.

Organ removal and evisceration is the same thing, so that doesn't count as two criteria. Likewise "dehumanisation" is a subjective judgement, so that can't count as a criterion either.

In the interests of accuracy, "same city" should read "mostly on the opposite sides of a densely-populated city", and "same time" should read "same decade" to more accurately reflect the nature of the timescales we're dealing with. "Same decade" doesn't sound quite so good, though, does it?

And if we MUST pile up the criteria to make the argument look more substantial than it actually is, why leave out "dismemberment"? Oh, that's right, we can't, because - with ONE solitary exception, who differed from the other Torso cases in some key aspects - dismemberment didn't feature at all in the small area of the East End where the canonical Ripper murders happened.
There are major dissimilarities and, even if there weren't, the thing about rare phenomena is that they sometimes can, and do, coincide. Precedents can, and do, happen.

Excellent post Gareth

Everything that as ever happened, at one point, happened for the first time. So how can we consider those events as unlikely to have occurred. As it appears to be ‘allowed’ to come up with possible reasons why one killer might have used 2 vastly different mo’s I find it strange to read the reactions when you produce explaination for the supposed similarities. Similarities which are often found to be not that similar when looked at objectively.

[Abby Normal]

As you know Abby I’ve never been impressed with the ‘well it’s never happened before argument.’

Scenario.

2 series of murders occur in the year 2018. Reasonable proximity. Reasonably close time frame. Widely different mo’s. Some similarities.

One group of people say - connected, another group says - unconnected.

If we say that Jack and TK were one and the same and one group says. ‘Has this ever occurred before?’ To which someone responded by mentioning Jack and TK. Does that fact, in itself, make it any likelier that the 2 x 2118 series were connected?

My answer would be - not really.

Question:

Has every series of murders (of any number of victims) in the history of crime been examined in minute detail for any ‘connections?’ We all know that the answer to that is a categorical no as it would be a mammoth, lifelong undertaking for a large group of people working together checking all crimes in small out of the way towns that never made it into books or even the worldwide public domain. So there has to be at least a possibility that something similar might have occurred before but it just hasn’t been discovered yet (and probably never will.)

Hi HS

yes yes I get all that. My point is-that apparently before torso/ripper there are no serial killers in London-then two appear at roughly the same time and end less roughly the same time. and then when does the next serial killer appear in London? not for a while right?


surely you can see the point. two appear out of nowhere, disappear and not another serial killer for a long time. chances alone dictate, seeing that they are both post mortem type serial killers who target female unfortunates, that they very well could be the same man.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi HS

yes yes I get all that. My point is-that apparently before torso/ripper there are no serial killers in London-then two appear at roughly the same time and end less roughly the same time. and then when does the next serial killer appear in London? not for a while right?


surely you can see the point. two appear out of nowhere, disappear and not another serial killer for a long time. chances alone dictate, seeing that they are both post mortem type serial killers who target female unfortunates, that they very well could be the same man.

Hi Abby,

I think that everyone understands it but they choose to dismiss it. I’m being totally honest here when I say that the it simply doesn’t bother me in the slightest when someone makes the statement about precedent. If there is a similarity, and as Gareth has showed it’s more complicated than that, then there are vast differences. To me this glaringly speaks of two killers killing under different circumstances and probably killing for different reasons. Why do similarities in the medical stuff trump the dissimilarities in MO?

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

I think that everyone understands it but they choose to dismiss it. I’m being totally honest here when I say that the it simply doesn’t bother me in the slightest when someone makes the statement about precedent. If there is a similarity, and as Gareth has showed it’s more complicated than that, then there are vast differences. To me this glaringly speaks of two killers killing under different circumstances and probably killing for different reasons. Why do similarities in the medical stuff trump the dissimilarities in MO?

Hello friend

I’m being totally honest here when I say that the it simply doesn’t bother me in the slightest when someone makes the statement about precedent.

but im not talking about precedent HS. im talking time frames. they both appear and disappear roughly the same time. with none before and none after (at least for a while).

could be a coincidence. I lean toward not, especially with all the other similarities.

If there is a similarity, and as Gareth has showed it’s more complicated than that, then there are vast differences. To me this glaringly speaks of two killers killing under different circumstances and probably killing for different reasons. Why do similarities in the medical stuff trump the dissimilarities in MO?

I do kind of agree with you that there are big differences (I wouldnt say vast-lol). Obviously there are, as no one connected them at the time and most still don't.

some just think the similarities out weigh the differences, and the differences could be explained by the killers circs and mindset.

the dissimilarities in MO?

part of MO is who (victimolgy) and how the killer gets the victims where he wants them. with the ripper, he posed as a client to get the victims to a secluded spot.

we dont know exactly how torso man did it, but Im pretty sure he used a ruse also-posing as someone who he was not-to get his victims where he wanted them. And since both victims of the series were prostitutes probably as a client also. but in this case back to his chop shop.


Part of MO is also how you dispose of the victim. Ripper left as is and torso dumped. this apparent difference could be explained because the torso victims were killed when he had his chop shop available and the ripper victims were when it was not-and he had to kill on the streets.


That being said-Both torso man and the ripper made no overt attempts at trying to hide the victims. ripper left them as is and may have even posed-spreading legs etc.-one thing for sure no attempt to hide. Not even dragging them behind something, covering up etc.


torsoman IMHO was also displaying his victims bodies/parts-in the bizarre way in which placed them. IMHO neither made any real concerted effort to hide.


now damage done to bodies (the sig)-to me it is the same-both post mortem mutilation to a female body with knife. they both seem to have a fascination with the female, external and internal, body and what there knife (or cutting instrument-saw in some regards with torsoman) can do to it.

in case of torso, dismemberment could also overlap into MO as ease in removing from his chop shop.


Let me ask you this HS-why is torso man doing all the postmortem mutilation above and beyond what was needed to just dismember? the vertical gashes to the abdoman, removing of flesh, removal of internal organs etc?