Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Torso Killer discussion from Millwood Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by JeffHamm View Post
    if the tides were found to be predominately flowing to the east, and given the bend at Vauxhall making it quite possible to be a collection point, then one might concentrate more on the bridge area in light blue (a few things washed ashore close to it, but as the river runs fairly straight, things drift away, then collect at the first bend, some making it past a bit, a few continuing.

    But, if the tides were generally in the opposite direction, one would consider the bridge in dark blue for the same reason. As the flow patterns of the river will be different for incoming and outgoing tides, which side of the river, north or south, tends to collect more debris, on incoming and outgoing tides would be good to know - even if there isn't a marked difference that's important to actually know rather than guess at.
    From memory, I believe the Police thought that the most likely dump site for Liz Jackson's body parts was the Albert Bridge (right hand one in the dark blue oval - the left hand bridge, Battersea bridge, had been demolished and was being rebuilt), and at an early morning time to catch the outgoing tide (west to east, as is the natural flow of the river). Certainly they dredged the river on both sides of this bridge in a fruitless attempt to recover her head. As Sam said, the two body parts found on land were located somewhere near either end of Albert Bridge, and the first part found was washed ashore very near it. Although another part was found, almost at the same time, five miles downstream near Tower Bridge.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

      From memory, I believe the Police thought that the most likely dump site for Liz Jackson's body parts was the Albert Bridge (right hand one in the dark blue oval - the left hand bridge, Battersea bridge, had been demolished and was being rebuilt), and at an early morning time to catch the outgoing tide (west to east, as is the natural flow of the river). Certainly they dredged the river on both sides of this bridge in a fruitless attempt to recover her head. As Sam said, the two body parts found on land were located somewhere near either end of Albert Bridge, and the first part found was washed ashore very near it. Although another part was found, almost at the same time, five miles downstream near Tower Bridge.
      Thanks for that, much appreciated. Yes, the west->east flow of the river would reduce any incoming tide drift towards the west. The Battersea bridge makes perfect sense as the common dumping point given the predominantly easterly flow to be expected. And as you say, the parts dumped on land near the bridge also point to that conclusion, so the various lines starting running together.

      that would make Battersea Bridge a good location to mark, the wash up points, however, would be otherwise uninformative to the Torso Killer's location as they reflect the behaviour of the river from the point the parts enter the water.

      - Jeff

      Comment


      • #18
        Ok, this will put the cat among the pigeons

        I've made a couple of assumptions about the deposit sites. I've marked the Battersea Bridge, and the location that's on land in the North East. I've also marked the bridge to the far west as the desposit location for the western most shore line find, and the bridge between Battersea and the western one that's in the south "bend".

        Now, I want to point out, my routines for dump sites are not well tested, so they could be quite inaccurate (they've worked for Gary Ridgeway, Ted Bundy, and Wayne Williams, but as the analysis was based upon the Ridgeway and William cases, the only real test was Bundy, and he was in zone 13 (so, better than chance, but not what I would call instilling great confidence). So, this is for entertainment purposes only.

        The main area prioritized is, not surprisingly, centred on Battersea Bridge. But, what some will find to their liking, there's a second, minor peak of interest in, Whitechapel. Just inside the blue line marking the devision of the C5, and the JtR hotspots are close to that line too.

        Have fun and be nice everyone.

        - Jeff

        Click image for larger version

Name:	Torso_Map_1888_v2_hugeSOL.jpg
Views:	218
Size:	137.9 KB
ID:	702507

        Comment


        • #19
          Because the crime zone is so large, the search area, even though reduced, will still be big. The more distance an offender travels, the less important small deviations will make, so the estimated areas of interest expand in size. This is not about pinpointing specific addresses, it's about trying to give a general idea of roughly where to look. It still requires good old fashioned shoe leather to solve things.

          - Jeff

          PS: The pink area is the highest priority zone, red zones are the next best, and when offenders are located in pink or red, then the analysis has done better than randomly searching.
          Last edited by JeffHamm; 03-01-2019, 02:22 AM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Interesting Jeff,

            Thanks for the work you put into the geo-profiling. I am not much for it, but, I will say it so happens the two men I feel were possibly involved with these cases both lived in or near the pink zone and worked in the red zone. In fact they worked at the site of the then New Whitehall Police Building. One of the more likely travel routes for one, Frederick Wildbore, took him across Albert Bridge, past the Shelley house, past the docks where the arm was found at Pimilco and straight to the vault where he stored his tools and the torso and leg were found. The other man, Richard Lawrence (his mate) also worked at the vault, possibly took a similar route to work and also lived at one time near the Pancras Lock where some of the 1887 Rainham torso parts were found in the Regents Canal. They were carpenters and would have been skilled with a saw.

            Whether they were murderers or not, I can't say. Perhaps they were only "body movers"? Both the Whitehall torso and the Pinchin torso were both predicted to be found before the discovery of the bodies. And on a small side note, I still personally feel the date of the death of the Whitehall woman was September 8th, 1888. Some see significance in that and others don't.

            Comment


            • #21
              For possible connections with the Torso and the Ripper a lot of people write off the graffiti found next to it but I'm thinking differently about it these days. "Lipski" is a strange coincidence to be found on the wall and happens to be said by the possible killer of Liz Stride when interrupted during his assault. What do others feel about this possible link? Connected? or just random graffiti not done at the time of the body dump?

              Last edited by RedBundy13; 03-01-2019, 05:11 AM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by RedBundy13 View Post
                For possible connections with the Torso and the Ripper a lot of people write off the graffiti found next to it but I'm thinking differently about it these days. "Lipski" is a strange coincidence to be found on the wall and happens to be said by the possible killer of Liz Stride when interrupted during his assault. What do others feel about this possible link? Connected? or just random graffiti not done at the time of the body dump?

                In 1887 a fellow by the name of Lipski was hanged for murder (as noted in the article). Because he was Jewish, his name was used in a derogatory way to refer to anybody who was Jewish - the name "Lipski" became an insult, and it was used fairly commonly apparently. In the Stride case, it is far more likely that broad shouldered man was yelling "Lipski" at Schwartz himself (who was described as being recognizably Jewish in appearance) and not calling out the name / code-name of a partner (pipe man). I think it was Anderson who pointed that out in 1888, and indicated that Lipski was a common insult. In that light, it makes the finding of it in Graffiti much less surprising.
                - Jeff

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by jerryd View Post
                  Interesting Jeff,

                  Thanks for the work you put into the geo-profiling. I am not much for it, but, I will say it so happens the two men I feel were possibly involved with these cases both lived in or near the pink zone and worked in the red zone. In fact they worked at the site of the then New Whitehall Police Building. One of the more likely travel routes for one, Frederick Wildbore, took him across Albert Bridge, past the Shelley house, past the docks where the arm was found at Pimilco and straight to the vault where he stored his tools and the torso and leg were found. The other man, Richard Lawrence (his mate) also worked at the vault, possibly took a similar route to work and also lived at one time near the Pancras Lock where some of the 1887 Rainham torso parts were found in the Regents Canal. They were carpenters and would have been skilled with a saw.

                  Whether they were murderers or not, I can't say. Perhaps they were only "body movers"? Both the Whitehall torso and the Pinchin torso were both predicted to be found before the discovery of the bodies. And on a small side note, I still personally feel the date of the death of the Whitehall woman was September 8th, 1888. Some see significance in that and others don't.
                  Hi,

                  It gets over hyped, certainly in the media and movies, and comes across as if the goal is to pin-point a specific address. That's used-car salesman talk. The goal is to suggest areas that have a higher probability of containing the offender than others. The probabilities are derived from emperical testing. In the simplest form, an offender could be anywhere, they may travel 100 miles every week just to commit their crimes in some specific area, or they may randomly drive in various directions. But they don't. If you have a bunch of crimes that you know are committed by the same offender, draw the smallest circle you can that rings in all the crimes. You've just done a geographical profile, and you have about 80% chance of just having drawn a circle around your offender (meaning, if you did that for the crime locations from 10 different series, Ted Bundy, Dennis Rader, Albert Desalvo, etc then you might only expect 2 of them to have escaped your net. Now, to be fair, some of those nets are still pretty big. The idea is to refine that, and try and figure out, where in my ring should I start my search. It's not fool proof, there are cases that "buck the trend" (like the 2 who don't live inside the circle we drew), but it's not about solving cases, that's what detectives and investigators do, it's about providing information with regards to probabilities, a suggested ranking of priorities - where to investigate next, until real leads and evidence get located. I guess, this is more about trying to suggest where might be a good place to find those leads and evidence. But it's cool to hear that some suspects exist in the locations highlighted.

                  - Jeff

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by RedBundy13 View Post
                    For possible connections with the Torso and the Ripper a lot of people write off the graffiti found next to it but I'm thinking differently about it these days. "Lipski" is a strange coincidence to be found on the wall and happens to be said by the possible killer of Liz Stride when interrupted during his assault. What do others feel about this possible link? Connected? or just random graffiti not done at the time of the body dump?

                    hi Red
                    as Jeff just pointed out Lipski was a common insult so maybe nothing to it. however, it is a possible link to the double event the shout of lipski, the ripper being interrupted by several jews that night and the gsg graffiti. and if you would have it (I do) a link to hutch, who was the only witness to incriminate a jew.

                    but as I lean toward the ripper and torsoman being the same, the graffiti of lipski by the pinchin torso is more than just another coincidence IMHO.
                    "Is all that we see or seem
                    but a dream within a dream?"

                    -Edgar Allan Poe


                    "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                    quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                    -Frederick G. Abberline

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                      hutch, who was the only witness to incriminate a jew.
                      Ahem. Emanuel Delbast Violena didn't try to implicate Pizer? I rather think he did. And unlike George Hutchinson, the police really did believe Violena was lying. But give it time; EBV, too, will be a suspect some day. It's the current flavor of Ripperology---if you can't solve the case, start blaming the bystanders and the witnesses.

                      As for Fisherman's original points. London was, and is, one of the largest and most populated cities in the world. To say that the Battersea case and the Pinchin Street torso case happened in the same "town" is about as meaningful as saying that a murder in Harlem and a murder on Staten Island happened in the same "town." Had the torsos all turned up in Wagon Wheel, North Dakota, the point would have been valid.

                      Further, in domestic killings, as well as in botched abortion cases, one strips the body of jewelry and other items in order to hide the identification of the victim. So the mere fact that two or more of the supposed victims had missing rings (which also have obvious monetary value) does not point to the same perpetrator; it merely points to inherent similarities in crimes of this sort. They share motive.

                      And that is the problem that Fisherman and other 'torso' theorists are up against. There are only so many ways to rob a bank or knock off a liquor store or to saw a leg in two. The mere fact that such crimes can be similar, or even amazingly similar, does not mean they were committed by the same individual.

                      But the real reason I wish to comment is that Fisherman suggests that all the Torso victims were "prostitutes." Please don't let Ms. Rubenhold get wind of this amazing claim, or Fish, too, will end up swimming in The Thames. Abby tried to pull this same stunt a while back. The Battersea, Regent's Canal, and Pinchin Street bodies, among others, were never positively identified. So by what stretch of the imagination does one conclude that they were all "prostitutes," let alone murdered during an act of prostitution?





                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post


                        But the real reason I wish to comment is that Fisherman suggests that all the Torso victims were "prostitutes." Please don't let Ms. Rubenhold get wind of this amazing claim, or Fish, too, will end up swimming in The Thames. Abby tried to pull this same stunt a while back. The Battersea, Regent's Canal, and Pinchin Street bodies, among others, were never positively identified. So by what stretch of the imagination does one conclude that they were all "prostitutes," let alone murdered during an act of prostitution?
                        i agree with your point about dismemberment, same as with ripping, when done it appears similar, does not mean it’s the same perpetrator.

                        i don’t think people are claiming ALL the torso victims were prostitutes. But that in the “series” there was a sometimes prostitute, so they can claim JtR and the torso killer both targeted prostitutes.

                        the fact that the only real clues about the unidentifieds’ social status points to them being not lowclass never seems to bother such theorists.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          With having all but one of the Torso Victims unidentified (arguably), its difficult to be certain if they were or were not prostitutes. But that said, I think we can make some reasonable assumptions. First off they were all women from the ages of between 20 to 50 give or take, which does put them in the age range of most of the unfortunates at the time (and I understand that thats probably the age of most women alive at that time in history, when life expectancy was much shorter than it is today), even still, there were no children or seniors, which IMO, besides prostitutes, would be the next best (or easiest) targets when looking for victims.
                          2nd, they were all but one unidentified. Which does say something about the possible class that they came from. Just as it is today, when prostitutes would go missing, it generally didn't cause as big a stir, unfortunately. If someone had a wife go missing or a daughter in college or mom who takes care of her kids who ends up going missing, chances are it would cause a bigger stir than a missing unfortunate.

                          Basically what I'm saying is, generally, more people would be going out of their way too search for the stay home mom, or daughter or working wife who's home every night than would be looking for a prostitute who may be using an assumed name, who may have moved to the city to escape her past life for whatever reason. However fair or unfair that is, I think we can all pretty much agree that thats more likely true than not. So besides being the easiest victims to get alone, the unfortunates were also the least likely to cause a fuss when missing.
                          Plus the one victim that was positively ID'ed had been a known prostitute.
                          Given everything that was known, but even more telling what was UNknown, points to the women most likely being prostitutes. Obviously thats not 100%, and possibly 1 or even 2 weren't active prostitutes at the time they were killed. But if I were a betting man, I think I would feel comfortable going "all-in" on they being Unfortunates.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Too many assumptions, Bundy.

                            In the 1873 case from Battersea, it was reported in the press that many people came forward looking for lost or missing relatives--wives, sisters, mothers, etc. That the victim remained unidentified was not down to the fact that there weren't people looking for missing friends or relatives, thus proving it was an "unfortunate." People were looking. This was an era with no safety net, weak methods of identification, and where people simply vanished off the face of the earth. I'm sure you've heard of "Potter's Field." There were entire graveyards devoted to unclaimed people or those who had no known living relatives. They weren't all prostitutes. In immigrant newspapers one sees "information wanted" ads by the dozens, of people looking for sisters or cousins that went abroad and were never heard from again.

                            Instead of gratuitously assuming that theses women were prostitutes, why not look at some solved cases, and see what you find? I think what you'll find is that a great many of the women found cut-up and dumped in the river or in ditches in the 19th Century were servant girls impregnated by their employers, and who subsequently fell prey to the back-alley abortionists, or were otherwise murdered by a seducer who didn't want the shame/expense of paying for an illegitimate child.

                            How about the most famous case of all, the young woman who was murdered in Whitechapel in 1875 and chopped up and thrown in the River? Was she a prostitute killed by a punter?

                            Actually, no. Harriet Lane was murdered by the man who had been "keeping her" as his mistress and poorly paid employee. And Wainwright got away with it for months. He initially explained Harriet's absence by claiming she ran-off to Europe with another man. And no one could prove otherwise. The police managed to solve this case, but if they hadn't, would Harriet Lane have been another one of the unidentified "torso victims" and "prostitutes" supposedly killed by Jack the Ripper?

                            And would that assumption have been correct?

                            By the way, on what do you base your assumption that the average prostitute fell between the ages of 20-50? I recently read a Victorian medical study, and of the prostitutes surveyed, the great majority were under the age of 20. One was 15 and several were 16. Only 1 woman was over the age of 40.

                            The Ripper, for the most part, killed middle-aged women, but this does not mean that the average East End prostitute was middle-aged.
                            Last edited by rjpalmer; 03-02-2019, 04:16 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Just checking some of the other discussions on the torso killings, and there's a good one summarizing the autopsy notes here : https://forum.casebook.org/forum/rip...-autopsy-notes

                              Not sure where the full autopsy notes are that Debra A was working from, which would be even better to review, but her summary contains some important information.

                              Importantly, the medical opinion was that there was no surgical skill being shown, rather, the skill set appeared to be that of a butcher/knacker/hunter, all of which would explain why the internal organs tend to be removed prior to the sectioning of the body.

                              Also, the kidneys seem to have been left in all of them. The uterus is often not removed. The 1887 torso appears to have been a virgin (so not a prostitute), and I think the only pregnant victim was Elizabeth Jackson (putting the "illegal abortionist" line to rest I think). No mutilation/removal of breasts appears to have occurred, unlike Kelly. Of course, the Pinchin Street torso did not have the arms removed, deviating from the pattern of other torso victims.

                              Medical opinion did suggest a strong likelihood of the 1887 torso and the Whitehall torso being dismembered by the same individual due to the skill employed in the disjointing of the limbs. I would want to ask, since I'm not knowledgeable enough to have an informed opinion of my own, if that could reflect two separate individuals both with similar knowledge (i.e. are we looking at two separate murders, perhaps where the killer was a butcher, and both resorted to dismemberment in order to get rid of the body? Or was there something individualistic about the methods employed that go beyond both knew what they were doing?)

                              - Jeff

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                A few personal observations I have regarding the torsos:

                                *Dr. Bond was involved in the 1873 case, yet he never included her with the "four" from 1887-1888.

                                *The Tottenham Court torso of 1884 had the head recovered. The eyes were plucked out, the nose cut off and cheek slashed to the mouth. The body parts appeared to have been packed on top of each other and covered in a disinfectant such as Chloride of Lime. A few months earlier, a large black portmanteau was found with clotted blood and something like decomposed flesh inside. It was found thrown over into a garden at Clarendon Gardens, Maida Vale, a block or two from Warwick Lock. Warwick Lock was thought to be a possible location of the dumping site of the Rainham torso parts by the St Pancras Lock Keeper. My point, don't count this torso out as a possible link to the series.

                                *And last, just as RJ stated, people put missing ads in the papers, I found this interesting one awhile back.


                                Lloyd's Weekly, August 21st, 1887 (referring to the Rainham torso)


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X