Torso Killer discussion from Millwood Thread

[rjpalmer]

sorry if you have already posted it but whats the order of dumpage in your mind-shelley estate first?

Hi Abby. See the second half of Post #107. I think it was dumped last. Remember that they would be driving on the left-hand side of the road. Cheers.

[bolo]

Hi Bolo!!!
well if he had a cart, no reason to take several trips, which would be much more risky.

Good point, he/they most probably wanted to get rid of the bodies as quickly as possible.

Goes to show that I really don't know much about the torso killings and badly need to read up on it.

[rjpalmer]

I only have time to make one final post, before abandoning ship, but doesn't Debrah Arif's observation that the police ran experiments with the tides, etc., and came up with a theoretical 6 a.m. dump time tend to confirm a single incident? The Thames is a tidal river. If there had been multiple dumps, those experiments would have turned out differently, no?

[Sam Flynn]

I only have time to make one final post, before abandoning ship, but doesn't Debrah Arif's observation that the police ran experiments with the tides, etc., and came up with a theoretical 6 a.m. dump time tend to confirm a single incident? The Thames is a tidal river. If there had been multiple dumps, those experiments would have turned out differently, no?

I don't know whether an hour or so's scattered dumping of individual parts have made that much of a difference, then maybe it might have.

That aside, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the washed-up body parts of the actual corpse(s) discovered at different times and at different points along the river? If so, that might in itself imply a staggered disposal.

[Fisherman]

Hi Fish how do we know he carried all the body parts out together in one go?

We don't. But its either that or fetch one part, go up on the bridge (or down to the bank), chuck it in - splash - and then return to the stash, fetch another part, go up on the bridge... You catch my drift, I believe. And Jackson had not been long in the water when she was found, so she will not have been thrown in on various days.

One good thing about this discussion is how I think we can rule out the often suggested boat. If the killer used a boat in the Jackson case, we must assume that he either made an immense 100-foot throw from its deck into the Shelley estate, or that he left one piece on board, steered his barge up onto the river bank, jumped off, threw the leg into the Shelley garden and then re-embarked upon his boat and backed it out onto the Thames again before disappearing.

[Fisherman]

Exactly. He could have disposed of the evidence piecemeal (pardon pun) over a few visits. This would have been less risky than if he lugged an entire disassembled body with him and dropped several pieces of corpse into the Thames all at once or in quick succession. He'd have been more conspicuous visually and audibly if he'd chosen to take the latter course of action.

No, Gareth, it is MORE risky, not less, to divide the dumping sessions into more than one. A man carrying a bag is not a conspicuous man in any way.

[Fisherman]

not so sure about that-why make several trips when you can get rid of it all at one go? seems to risky to make several trips

Ah - somebody reasons logically. Good.

[Fisherman]

It's possible, of course, but personally I don't see it as a credible scenario. One piece is on the Chelsea side of the river in shrubbery. One piece is on the Battersea side in the shrubbery. Most of the rest of it is in the Thames. That's quite a stretch of real-estate. There is a home base, somewhere. Why would the culprit risk lugging incriminating evidence all the way across the bridge when he could have simply tossed it over the edge? Whether he was in Battersea or in Chelsea, your scenario has him walking all the way over the bridge, holding on to the remains the whole while, only to inexplicably keep trudging on to dump it a considerable distance away on dry land. If he was carefully going back and forth to dispose of the body, it seems likely it would ALL have ended up in the river.

No, I think this was just one mad dash, and the work of a scared amateur. The 90-100 pounds of remains were hardly carried in his knapsack. He had a vehicle of some sort, and that is why the remains are scattered from Chelsea all the way to Battersea park, with the bridge being the common denominator. It was meant to go in the river, but it was a ****-up due to incidental traffic and fear of detection.

The bridge is high. I doubt anyone would hear a splash at 6 a.m. even if they were walking across the top of it. He has a vehicle and an accomplice in the back of it, tossing it over the edge as they drive by. They ran out of time and ended up in Battersea Park. All in my humble opinion.

But, of course, both scenarios are conjecture.

Any idea why he did n ot toss them all into the Thames in one go? Your suggestion makes it sound was if he was unable to stop his cart and was forced to throw the parts out as the vehicle sped away.

[Fisherman]

HI RJ
I agree he probably used a cart, but it would have taken mere seconds to throw it all out at once, especially if there was an accomplice in back tossing it out. so theyre going along and toss a part on land first? then some over the bridge in the river, cross the bridge and then another part on land? as you say that is quite of real estate to cover for a couple of people hurridly trying to get rid of body parts when it would have taken mere seconds to toss all of it quickly.

sorry if you have already posted it but whats the order of dumpage in your mind-shelley estate first ? then over and off the bridge? and finally the major section of the Torso in Battersea park (this is the part that could have possibly been thrown off the bridge but still was found 200 yards from the river)?

Yes, Abby, yes, yes, yes - THAT is how it is normally done - put the parts in a bag and throw them all into the river at the same time. If you carry them on a cart, stop the cart, grab the parts and throw them in.

Simplicity. Gotta love it.

[Fisherman]

I don't know whether an hour or so's scattered dumping of individual parts have made that much of a difference, then maybe it might have.

That aside, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the washed-up body parts of the actual corpse(s) discovered at different times and at different points along the river? If so, that might in itself imply a staggered disposal.

The parts were found over a period of some five days. The reasonable thing to surmise is that the parts that had lain in the water almost a week gave the impression of just such a thing, whereas the parts found the day after the murder (Dr Kempster reasoned that the leg found on there 4:th had not been in the water for more than 24 hours, telling us that this was a parameter that was checked) will have looked relatively fresh.

The different sites in which the parts were found will find an explanation in the exact same thing - they had been adrift for varying amounts of time. The Thames being a tidal river will make it very hard to make sense out of the last sites, chronologically - there is the possibility that parts have floated in both directions of the river, depending on their positions out on it. Incoming tide can push objects westwards in the Thames.

[Fisherman]

I only have time to make one final post, before abandoning ship, but doesn't Debrah Arif's observation that the police ran experiments with the tides, etc., and came up with a theoretical 6 a.m. dump time tend to confirm a single incident? The Thames is a tidal river. If there had been multiple dumps, those experiments would have turned out differently, no?

Basically, it is impossible to predict how a part in the Thames will float and where it will end up unless we use a very short period of time. Just as I said in my post to Gareth, the incoming tide can cause parts to drift westwards. Can, that is; it all depends on where on the surface they float. I am a keen fisherman myself, and I know that even in non-tidal rivers, there are all sorts of streams running in all sorts of directions. When flyfishing, a fly placed on the surface can seem to end up at the approximate same spot two throws in a row - but if there is just a very small deviation, the stream may carry it in very varying directions.

I would think that what can be suggested are very rough general lines only, nothing more than so. I do, however, believe that the parts were dumped at the same occasion, since it would be impractical and dangerous not to do so.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby. See the second half of Post #107. I think it was dumped last. Remember that they would be driving on the left-hand side of the road. Cheers.

Thanks RJ!
Got it.

So theyre in a cart, toss the largest portion of the torso out first (possibly as they are first getting on the bridge) it lands on land in Battersea park but yet some 200 yards from the river, then as they get further over the bridge (and over the water) they toss out most of the remaining parts, then about a half mile away they throw out the last part, a leg, into the shelley estate.

Does this make sense? why hold onto that last part, the leg, so long?

[Abby Normal]

re the 6am dump time est. Wouldn't it have been totally bright daylight out by that time? and tons of people about?
from memory I thought the estimated dump time was anywhere around 4-6am.

I cant for the life of me imagining someone dumping body parts in the total daylit morning. to me a 4:30-5:00 dump seems more reasonable.

[Sam Flynn]

to me a 4:30-5:00 dump seems more reasonable.

You need to cut down on the All-Bran.

[Abby Normal]

Hmm. Now I'm left wondering why there was a large piece of the Ulster coat left in the park not far from the torso section.

hi debs
any more ideas about this? could it just have been with the torso when it was dumped, and if thrown together from the bridge with the torso would explain why it landed nearby?