Pinchin Street Torso - who did it?

[Errata]

Case IV September 11 1889 Pinchin Street Whitechapel

Remains consisted of the trunk and arms of a female body, head cut off at lower part of neck, thighs sparated at hip joints.
Rigor mortis had passed off, the cut surfaces of the hips were black and dry but the surfaces at the neck moist and red.
The skin of the abdomen had been cut by a vertical incision, running from two inches below the ensiform cartilage downwards and ending on the left side of the external genitals, just opening the vagina but not opening the peritoneal cavity. There were a number of small round bruises on the forearms and arms, most on the inner surface of the forearms and varying in size from a shilling to a sixpence.On the left wrist were 2 cuts one just grazing the skin.
Incision sparating the head was 2 in number. The spinal column was divided at the junction of the 5th and 6th cervical vertebrae.
Thighs separated at hip joints, the skin cut through by 2 or 3 sweeping circular incisions. the capsule of the hip joints were opened and the heads neatly disarticulated.

Doctors inferences

Age above 25 but not yet reached menopause, possibly over 25 but under 40. Had not borne children. Apparently not a virgin. Skin fair and hair dark brown, hands shapely and the skin soft with right little finger showing a small circular hardening, as might be made by writing.
No mark on the ring finger.
Immediate cause of death was syncope, as shown by the condition of the heart and general bloodlessness of the tissue which would indicate hemorrage as the cause of syncope.
All cuts made after death with a sharp knife and all made from left to right except those separating the right thigh and right arm which had been carried from right to left across the flexure joints so probably done by a right handed man.
The incisions were made with skill and design and were skillfully performed as by a man who had some knowledge of the position of joints and the readiest means of separating limbs, such as a butcher or slaughterer would possess. No secial knowledge of anatomy of the human body shown.

Just having had surgery on the 6/7 vertebral disc, separating the head at 5/6 vertebral disc is kind of mad. That’s almost below the level of shoulders. My incision is just above the clavicle and is a 45 degree angle down to the spine. I can’t imagine why someone would cut that low. And I think they would need to sit the corpse upright in order to even accomplish it, which is just weird.

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

The Inquest for the Pinchin street victim shows the disarticulation, plus "a wound 15ins. long through the external coat of the abdomen" and "On the outer side of the left forearm, about 3in. above the wrist, was a cut about 2in. in length, and half an inch lower down was another cut." Where are these autopsy reports that show far greater mutilation?

Case IV September 11 1889 Pinchin Street Whitechapel

Remains consisted of the trunk and arms of a female body, head cut off at lower part of neck, thighs sparated at hip joints.
Rigor mortis had passed off, the cut surfaces of the hips were black and dry but the surfaces at the neck moist and red.
The skin of the abdomen had been cut by a vertical incision, running from two inches below the ensiform cartilage downwards and ending on the left side of the external genitals, just opening the vagina but not opening the peritoneal cavity. There were a number of small round bruises on the forearms and arms, most on the inner surface of the forearms and varying in size from a shilling to a sixpence.On the left wrist were 2 cuts one just grazing the skin.
Incision sparating the head was 2 in number. The spinal column was divided at the junction of the 5th and 6th cervical vertebrae.
Thighs separated at hip joints, the skin cut through by 2 or 3 sweeping circular incisions. the capsule of the hip joints were opened and the heads neatly disarticulated.

Doctors inferences

Age above 25 but not yet reached menopause, possibly over 25 but under 40. Had not borne children. Apparently not a virgin. Skin fair and hair dark brown, hands shapely and the skin soft with right little finger showing a small circular hardening, as might be made by writing.
No mark on the ring finger.
Immediate cause of death was syncope, as shown by the condition of the heart and general bloodlessness of the tissue which would indicate hemorrage as the cause of syncope.
All cuts made after death with a sharp knife and all made from left to right except those separating the right thigh and right arm which had been carried from right to left across the flexure joints so probably done by a right handed man.
The incisions were made with skill and design and were skillfully performed as by a man who had some knowledge of the position of joints and the readiest means of separating limbs, such as a butcher or slaughterer would possess. No secial knowledge of anatomy of the human body shown.

[Fiver]

Years back Deb sent me the link to the actual scans of the autopsy reports (as published) and I remember thinking if the killers only goal was to access EJ's stomach the wounds inflicted need not run so far or enter the vagina

The Inquest for the Pinchin street victim shows the disarticulation, plus "a wound 15ins. long through the external coat of the abdomen" and "On the outer side of the left forearm, about 3in. above the wrist, was a cut about 2in. in length, and half an inch lower down was another cut." Where are these autopsy reports that show far greater mutilation?

[Abby Normal]

I was referring more to the reason he left the torso in Pinchin Street.

oh ok lol. im thinking he didnt have his regular bolt hole and or cart available. with a smidgeon of ripper like shock value in the street in ripper territory.

[Harry D]

hey no fair! well from what you said before -he was losing his desire to kill/mutilate anymore? well if it is that then its a definite possibility. while rare, some serial killers just stop for personal reasons-they get burnt out/ tired of it, grow out of it, etc. Kemper is one example and I cant help but feel the GSK also stopped for personal reasons (family?)

I was referring more to the reason he left the torso in Pinchin Street.

[Michael W Richards]

lol. Thanks for your confidence in my research. I appreciate it. However, I have so many irons in this fire. To be honest, other than Wildbore/John Arnold, I can't settle on any one area to focus on. I think I must have at least 10 men and 1 woman that I feel could be involved somehow, some way. The woman can be taken light heartedly, although, she was certainly a violent one. I am enjoying the history of these people though, and that keeps me going. People like Matthew Cleary, who I feel is the "real" John Cleary suggested by Claude Mellor to be involved in the Pinchin crime. I have significant evidence of him being one and the same man. Whether he was involved with John Arnold or not is up for question.

Charles LeGrand, John Meiklejohn, The Conways, Charles Hammond, Jack Saul, Franklin Sydney King, Walter Selwen and Albert Bachert top the list as well of interesting characters and possibilities of people that COULD play a role in all this. This is all for another time and another thread, of course. I also can't forget our young friend, Isaac Lewis Jacobs. The young man that was heading to Mc Carthy's at Millers Court to pick up supper for his brother at 12:45 a.m. on the night of Alice McKenzies murder.

P.S. I am leaving LeGrand for the more talented research of Tom Wescott and Debs Arif. They know much more about him than I do. But I like him [LeGrand] as a contributor, none the less.

Hey Jerry,

Maybe you could add Joseph Issacs to that gang....seriously though, I had a thought yesterday that what if Issacs is the Issacs that Louis went out with, and also Strides killer, and he is also the other "Joe" that Mary was seeing while seeing Barnett. The one that used to treat her ill. Issac Kozebrodski said that Louis sent him out alone to seek help, Louis said he and Issac[s] went out. What if that wasn't a misquote?

I know he was later apprehended and they, for whatever reason, felt he had an alibi, but those can be manufactured too.

[Fisherman]

Well, whether I agree or not, how do you propose to find out more about it? I mean, we have every single source from the Pinchin case available to us, so what exactly should be done to find out more?

Then again, you were not aware of the sack imprints. Although the source was there. So that is what I propose - that I may have missed out on or forgotten something that could have a bearing on the matter. I find that whenever I look into a specific detail, a rereading of the material can often shed light on things.

Okay, so we're probably going to be disagreeing a little bit about the chronology of things here, but no matter.

I was just asking why you stated the police decided no cart was used. Did the police conclude that?

I beleive what I stated was that the police could find no tracks from a cart and that noone had heard one (there were people sleeping in the arches), and so they realized they may need to prioritize a manual transport. The initial problem was your belief that this murder was the likeliest to have involved a cart transport.

This was just a thought I had when you stated there was no indication that more killers were involved. I believe the bruises on her arms are consistent with her being held tight. Since there was no cause of death discernible on her body, she was likely strangled or had her throat cut. Which is difficult to do when holding her arms. She also had bruises on her back. So overall, the bruises are consistent with her being assaulted by more than one man.

The marks can of course have been inflicted at any stage, and so there is no reason - to my mind - to believe in two persons. Nor to rule it out.

[jerryd]

please god tell me your writing a book lol. forthwith my pre order!

lol. Thanks for your confidence in my research. I appreciate it. However, I have so many irons in this fire. To be honest, other than Wildbore/John Arnold, I can't settle on any one area to focus on. I think I must have at least 10 men and 1 woman that I feel could be involved somehow, some way. The woman can be taken light heartedly, although, she was certainly a violent one. I am enjoying the history of these people though, and that keeps me going. People like Matthew Cleary, who I feel is the "real" John Cleary suggested by Claude Mellor to be involved in the Pinchin crime. I have significant evidence of him being one and the same man. Whether he was involved with John Arnold or not is up for question.

Charles LeGrand, John Meiklejohn, The Conways, Charles Hammond, Jack Saul, Franklin Sydney King, Walter Selwen and Albert Bachert top the list as well of interesting characters and possibilities of people that COULD play a role in all this. This is all for another time and another thread, of course. I also can't forget our young friend, Isaac Lewis Jacobs. The young man that was heading to Mc Carthy's at Millers Court to pick up supper for his brother at 12:45 a.m. on the night of Alice McKenzies murder.

P.S. I am leaving LeGrand for the more talented research of Tom Wescott and Debs Arif. They know much more about him than I do. But I like him [LeGrand] as a contributor, none the less.

[Abby Normal]

Thanks Abby.

There really isn't even a hint of conspiracy involved in the multiple killer theory. If you read the link I am providing here, The Philadelphia Times report in December of 1888, you will see the London City police held the view that Eddowes and Stride were killed by two separate hands. A copy of this news clipping was included in the Metropolitan Police files, btw.

Here is a quote from the clip for example.

The city detectives then early in the first week of October came to a definite conclusion, namely, that the two women met their death at the hands of different men

https://www.casebook.org/press_repor.../pt881203.html

please god tell me your writing a book lol. forthwith my pre order!

[jerryd]

hi kattrup
jerry dunlop has provided alot of interesting evidence that the torsoripper was actaully more than one man working in concert and while i usually dont go for conspiracy theories his research has really come up with some intriguing possibilities. are you familiar with jerrys work?

Thanks Abby.

There really isn't even a hint of conspiracy involved in the multiple killer theory. If you read the link I am providing here, The Philadelphia Times report in December of 1888, you will see the London City police held the view that Eddowes and Stride were killed by two separate hands. A copy of this news clipping was included in the Metropolitan Police files, btw.

Here is a quote from the clip for example.

The city detectives then early in the first week of October came to a definite conclusion, namely, that the two women met their death at the hands of different men

https://www.casebook.org/press_repor.../pt881203.html

[jerryd]

A possible explanation for the gash down the midsection.


Inspector Charles Pinhorn [Pinchin Street Torso Inquest]

The chemise was entire, although at first site it had the appearance of being in pieces, as it had been cut open from top to bottom.

[Abby Normal]

Well, whether I agree or not, how do you propose to find out more about it? I mean, we have every single source from the Pinchin case available to us, so what exactly should be done to find out more?



Okay, so we're probably going to be disagreeing a little bit about the chronology of things here, but no matter.

I was just asking why you stated the police decided no cart was used. Did the police conclude that?




This was just a thought I had when you stated there was no indication that more killers were involved. I believe the bruises on her arms are consistent with her being held tight. Since there was no cause of death discernible on her body, she was likely strangled or had her throat cut. Which is difficult to do when holding her arms. She also had bruises on her back. So overall, the bruises are consistent with her being assaulted by more than one man.

hi kattrup
jerry dunlop has provided alot of interesting evidence that the torsoripper was actaully more than one man working in concert and while i usually dont go for conspiracy theories his research has really come up with some intriguing possibilities. are you familiar with jerrys work?

[Kattrup]

I´m afraid a picture that involves a high police official like Swanson speaking of damage done to the bowels and uterus must to a degree mean that we have no totally clear picture. That is the nature of things - once different high-ranking and normally reliable sources say different things, the picture is blurred. I am very much aware that the doctors say that the abdominal cavity was not opened, and I agree very much that this makes it very likely that it was not - but Swansons report nevertheless means that a measure of uncertainty creeps in.

This aside, the point I was originally making was that the statement about protruding innards and Swansons report on damaged bowels and uterus may have been what lay behind Pennett speaking about "disembowelment". Clearly, there was an initial idea that the abdominal contents were to a degree damaged. And I for one would be very interested to know how this information was formed. Who told Swanson that the uterus had been damaged together with the bowels? It would take an examination involving an opening up of the body to conclude that. So it sounds to me like somebody attached to the medical investigation provided the information. Swanson could not have taken it out of thin air. Ergo, there is an enigma here that would be interesting to find out more about - regardless if you agree about this or not.

Well, whether I agree or not, how do you propose to find out more about it? I mean, we have every single source from the Pinchin case available to us, so what exactly should be done to find out more?

As for the notion that the body was carried to the spot manually, it remains that Pennet and Pinhorn seems to have provided the information behind it. A distance of 250 yards from the spot was searched and people were interviewed in those quarters on account of how it was thought that the torso was manually carried to the spot. No certainty could be reached and so no decision could be made about how the torso got there. I offered this information as a response to how you claimed that the Pinchin Street torso was the one torso where it was decided that it must have been transported by way of cart (or something such). That could easily mislead people into thinking that this was a natural thing since the body was found in Whitechapel, whereas the facts are that the police sought the perp in quarters close to the dumping site, thinking the dumping may well have been a manual one.

Okay, so we're probably going to be disagreeing a little bit about the chronology of things here, but no matter.

I was just asking why you stated the police decided no cart was used. Did the police conclude that?

When it comes to the bruising on her arms, exactly what is it that makes you think that there were two persons involved?

This was just a thought I had when you stated there was no indication that more killers were involved. I believe the bruises on her arms are consistent with her being held tight. Since there was no cause of death discernible on her body, she was likely strangled or had her throat cut. Which is difficult to do when holding her arms. She also had bruises on her back. So overall, the bruises are consistent with her being assaulted by more than one man.

[Fisherman]

Well, I think we have a very clear picture. Clearer than most, considering we have doctors describing the wound? So I hope you'll dig in further and eventually tell us whether you think the bowels were protruding or not.

As mentioned, I'm also interested in the idea that the police concluded the torso was carried there. Is that based solely on the inquest testimony of Bennet and Pinhorn (I think those were the names) or is there something else?

Concerning multiple killers, the bruises on her arms seem consistent with at least two killers, do you agree? Just saying that there are indications that could indicate more people involved in the crimes.

I´m afraid a picture that involves a high police official like Swanson speaking of damage done to the bowels and uterus must to a degree mean that we have no totally clear picture. That is the nature of things - once different high-ranking and normally reliable sources say different things, the picture is blurred. I am very much aware that the doctors say that the abdominal cavity was not opened, and I agree very much that this makes it very likely that it was not - but Swansons report nevertheless means that a measure of uncertainty creeps in.

This aside, the point I was originally making was that the statement about protruding innards and Swansons report on damaged bowels and uterus may have been what lay behind Pennett speaking about "disembowelment". Clearly, there was an initial idea that the abdominal contents were to a degree damaged. And I for one would be very interested to know how this information was formed. Who told Swanson that the uterus had been damaged together with the bowels? It would take an examination involving an opening up of the body to conclude that. So it sounds to me like somebody attached to the medical investigation provided the information. Swanson could not have taken it out of thin air. Ergo, there is an enigma here that would be interesting to find out more about - regardless if you agree about this or not.

As for the notion that the body was carried to the spot manually, it remains that Pennet and Pinhorn seems to have provided the information behind it. A distance of 250 yards from the spot was searched and people were interviewed in those quarters on account of how it was thought that the torso was manually carried to the spot. No certainty could be reached and so no decision could be made about how the torso got there. I offered this information as a response to how you claimed that the Pinchin Street torso was the one torso where it was decided that it must have been transported by way of cart (or something such). That could easily mislead people into thinking that this was a natural thing since the body was found in Whitechapel, whereas the facts are that the police sought the perp in quarters close to the dumping site, thinking the dumping may well have been a manual one.

When it comes to the bruising on her arms, exactly what is it that makes you think that there were two persons involved?

[Kattrup]

What I am certain of is that I never let others decide for me what I believe or not, Kattrup. If the bowels were penetrated and the uterus was partially damaged, then the knife must have passed into the abdominal cavity. That means that there must have been an opening into the abdominal cavity. And what is required for the bowels to protrude is exactly that: an opening into the abdominal cavity.
The Pinchin Street trunk was lying on it´s stomach. The bowels would have been striving downwards by way of gravity. And if there was an opening into the abdominal cavity, that may have offered a possibility for the bowels to protrude through it.

That is not the same as saying that all of them or a large portion of them protruded. It is merely to say that the sources actually open up for a possibility that some portion of them did.

Hebbert said that the peritoneal cavity was not opened whereas the vagina was. But Swanson clearly speaks of damage done to the bowels and uterus, and he must have gotten that information from somewhere. Clarke, at the inquest, said that there was a 15 inch wound through the external coat of the abdomen. Phillips said nothing about the wound at all, as per the Times of the 25:th, but in his report he stated that the wound did not open the abdominal cavity.

As usual, we have no clear picture. Some more digging seems to be needed. Swanson must have been informed by somebody about the damage to the bowels and the uterus, and that somebody was of course not Pennett.

At any rate, if there was an initial take on matters that involved protruding bowels, and damaged innards (and it seems there was, stretching all the way to Swanson), that may have lain behind why disembowelment was spoken of by Pennett. Right or wrong.

Well, I think we have a very clear picture. Clearer than most, considering we have doctors describing the wound? So I hope you'll dig in further and eventually tell us whether you think the bowels were protruding or not.

As mentioned, I'm also interested in the idea that the police concluded the torso was carried there. Is that based solely on the inquest testimony of Bennet and Pinhorn (I think those were the names) or is there something else?

Concerning multiple killers, the bruises on her arms seem consistent with at least two killers, do you agree? Just saying that there are indications that could indicate more people involved in the crimes.