Torso Killer discussion from Millwood Thread

[jerryd]

I simply don't know, JR. It might well be. Jerry is probably the best person to answer that. I found the newspaper description that mentioned that the house fronted the embankment and had tall trees and railings was all. It's been 15 years since I first read some of this stuff and topography is not my thing at all!

Hi Debs,

There were two Shelley houses in the area. The "other one" was their theatre on Tite Street which later became Shelley Court. The one in question, on the embankment, is precisely where Joshua has it pegged on his map.



We know from your research that Claude Mellor had disembarked from a steamship at a Chelsea Pier. Upon walking along the embankment he approached the Shelley house where he saw a partially concealed large package in the underbrush of the garden. He located PC Jones (182B) and they proceeded to the estate and approached through the stables and over to the railing where the parcel was thrown over the bushes. It was determined the parcel could not have been pushed through the railing from the estate side but may have been placed there from the embankment side or thrown over the bushes. A later discovery revealed the bush tops were bent and broken. So, to me, because of the mention of approaching through the stables, it seems the garden was on the property itself, where the house stood.

In later years, Harry St.John Hornby stated he lived in a cottage situated in the garden of the Shelley Estate. This shows it was a rather expansive estate fronting the embankment with a large garden attached to the property.

https://ilab.org/sites/default/files...denecatpdf.pdf (pages 6 and 7) Picture of the Cottage

Nice picture of the niche you found earlier too, Debs. Thanks for posting it!

[Joshua Rogan]

We should probably start a new thread or find an old one for this discussion but I can't be bothered...so-
I was looking at an old postcard site and they listed an undated promotional postcard by Daneshill Brick & Tile Works, Ltd., Basingstoke, entitled:

Niche with 1¾" Moulded “Daneshill” Bricks at “Shelley House,” Chelsea

The niche is pictured and corresponds exactly to the niche on the side of the corner house directly before #1 Embankment Gardens. Is this where you placed it?

Wow, you look at some niche websites! Not that I can talk, I was just reading one about a WREN who was stationed in Shelley House during the war; she was in charge of pay for the crews of motor torpedo boats (which, incidentally, were built by Thorneycroft at Chiswick, the very spot where Druitt's body was found).
Well spotted though. Yes, that corner house I believe is the Shelley House. The side seems to have the same railings and drop to the basement as the front, but the hedge visible in Jerry's 1909 photo probably extended back from that odd freestanding bit of wall visible to the right.
Shame the statue seems to have disappeared, along with the iron fire escape at the back (also visible in Jerry's photo), I suspect they went toward the war effort. But at least we know what bricks it's made from.

[Sam Flynn]

I do, however, believe that the parts were dumped at the same occasion, since it would be impractical and dangerous not to do so.

I don't see anything particularly impractical or dangerous in going for a quiet stroll in the dead of night to drop off one or two pieces at a time.

[Kattrup]

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.

How short a period would you think? 5-10 minutes - or more?

Do you think no-one would be able to predict where the parts would turn up?

[Debra A]

Was the parcel found at the front of the house, do you know? Judging from old maps and street-view (so I could easily be wrong), the front of the house just had railings protecting a drop to the basement, not really the place for a hedge. Unless possibly there was one outside of the railings. The photo posted by Jerry was taken from the back of the house, and shows an impressively tall hedge to the side, which separates the garden from the substantial grounds of the Chelsea Hospital. Could this be where the leg was tossed over?

We should probably start a new thread or find an old one for this discussion but I can't be bothered...so-
I was looking at an old postcard site and they listed an undated promotional postcard by Daneshill Brick & Tile Works, Ltd., Basingstoke, entitled:

Niche with 1¾" Moulded “Daneshill” Bricks at “Shelley House,” Chelsea

The niche is pictured and corresponds exactly to the niche on the side of the corner house directly before #1 Embankment Gardens. Is this where you placed it?

[Fisherman]

unless of course the man needs to cross the bridge to get to the other side.

I would have thought that goes without saying, actually. But one must accept that logic dictates that he arrived to the bridge from the side where he had cut up Jackson. It MUST not be so, but any other suggestion is by nature awkward since it would include a previous river crossing with no dumping made.

So if I am correct and he arrived at the bridge from the side where he had cut up Jackson - what possible reasons would he have for crossing the bridge? Why would he not return back the same way he came, minimizing his exposure on the bridge?

And why would he not dump all the parts at the beginning of the bridge? What possessed him to bring a leg - or a torso section - all the way over the bridge, when he could have dumped either of these parts at the beginning of the bridge? Why cross over the whole bridge with that part, whichever one of them it was? If he began in Chelsea, there is of course the possibility that he dumped that leg first of all, long before he reached the bridge - but when he DID, why would he not chuck the rest in the water pronto and be done with it? If he came from the other side, why did he get it into his head to dump everything but the leg, hold on to it for half a mile and only then throw it over the fence to a private estate? And why THAT estate, when there were others by it´s side?

Surely, things like these can never be the likeliest thing to do for a man who is in a haste to rid himself of incriminating evidence?

[RockySullivan]

For that matter, why did he even cross that damn bridge in the first place? Logically, he would have come from either the north or the south side of it, and whichever applies, it is selfevident that he probably had his lair/lodgings on the side he came from. So why in the whole world would he cross the bridge in toto, instead of just chucking the parts in and RETURN?

If he came from the south side, actually crossed the bridge and proceeded half a mile before he threw the leg into the Shelley garden, then there can be little doubt that it was something he aimed to do from the outset, methinks. Also, if he DID come from that side, it seems he was so anxious to get rid of his parts that he started throwing them away even before he had reached out over the water. Does such a squeamish man, speeding up the process all he can, proceed over the bridge in it´s entire length, carrying a dismembered leg on his person, and walking half a mile from the bridge to throw it into a garden? Not very likely.

unless of course the man needs to cross the bridge to get to the other side.

[Fisherman]

For that matter, why did he even cross that damn bridge in the first place? Logically, he would have come from either the north or the south side of it, and whichever applies, it is selfevident that he probably had his lair/lodgings on the side he came from. So why in the whole world would he cross the bridge in toto, instead of just chucking the parts in and RETURN?

If he came from the south side, actually crossed the bridge and proceeded half a mile before he threw the leg into the Shelley garden, then there can be little doubt that it was something he aimed to do from the outset, methinks. Also, if he DID come from that side, it seems he was so anxious to get rid of his parts that he started throwing them away even before he had reached out over the water. Does such a squeamish man, speeding up the process all he can, proceed over the bridge in it´s entire length, carrying a dismembered leg on his person, and walking half a mile from the bridge to throw it into a garden? Not very likely.

[Fisherman]

I can't see the mystery. A hedge is surely a perfect place to chuck something you want to disappear from view.

The problem would be why he did not throw it away BEFORE he arrived at the hedge at the Shelley estate. It seems there were other buildings adjacent to the estate where he could have thrown the leg, not to mention that there was a large river - which he normally favored for dumping purposes - nearby. How logical or likely is it that he would carry a leg eighthundred yards or so before choosing to rid himself of it under those circumstances?

If the estate had been at the bridge, it would have been another matter, or if it had been the only house around. Neither applies, though, and so the conclusion that he CHOSE the house becomes inescapable.

[RockySullivan]

I can't see the mystery. A hedge is surely a perfect place to chuck something you want to disappear from view.

Sam, how big a hedge we talkin here?

[Sam Flynn]

I can't see the mystery. A hedge is surely a perfect place to chuck something you want to disappear from view.

[Abby Normal]

I just want to reiterate that the leg in the shelley estate, either thrown over the fence/hedge first or last is around a half mile away from the bridge and where the other parts are found or thrown from.

I favor rpalmers scenario of the leg thrown in the shelley estate last. So after dumping all the parts off or very near the bridge, torsoman is going to hold onto this last leg for a half a mile or more before tossing it over a tall fence and hedge into someones yard, when he had the whole half mile or so to get rid if it anywhere, and again including the river which was just as near as the shelley yard on the other side of the road.

does this make sense to anyone as a random, just trying to get rid of quickly scenario??? Not to me.
add to that it just happens to be tossed in frankensteins garden??cmon.

makes total sense though if it was thrown there on purpose.
which it was.

[Fisherman]

Sorry, Abby, I missed this. There's always a lot of posts made in just one day!
As I said to Rocky in my last post, I wondered if the piece of Ulster being in park pointed away from the section being thrown from the bridge. I don't think a lone piece of fabric would travel/land in the same way/area as a parceled up section of human remains?

It would certainly be unexpected if the torso part was first undressed, then parcelled up and then put in a section of the ulster. Do we know how close to each other the torso part and the ulster part were?

[Fisherman]

Just a lower leg complete with foot were found. No arm. The mentioning of an arm was a mistake by one newspaper in a press agency statement where they changed 'leg' for 'arm'. The leg was found under a mound of earth that had been made when digging a ditch for drainage in the vault six weeks before the torso find. The assumption was that the leg was accidentally buried during that work and had been on the surface originally. As the torso was. The state of decomposition supported the idea of an accidental burial some weeks earlier. The leg had decomposed accordingly with the flesh part buried under the earth not as decomposed as the sole of the sole of the foot, which had been uppermost and not completely covered by earth.

Doctors commented on the three different types of decay shown, the arm in water, the leg under the soil and the much decomposed torso in air. If the remains had been stored elsewhere and deposited in the vault at a later date wouldn't they have needed to have been stored in the same conditions they were found? The torso out in the open, the arm in water and the leg partially buried with sole of foot uppermost, to replicate the rate of decay under different conditions?

Okay, it was just a leg - I think it was Trow who messed it up in his book, and it has stuck in my mind. Just as you say, the decomposition grades seem to speak of a time of burial on the legs account that is later than the dumping of the torso. So unless the killer came back and buried the leg, the suggestion of an accidental burial seems to be on target.

[Debra A]

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?

Sorry, Abby, I missed this. There's always a lot of posts made in just one day!
As I said to Rocky in my last post, I wondered if the piece of Ulster being in park pointed away from the section being thrown from the bridge. I don't think a lone piece of fabric would travel/land in the same way/area as a parceled up section of human remains?