Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Paris Torso Mystery

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

  • #91
    This article will be interesting to some, published in the 'Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling', July 2023

    (PDF) The significance of unusual acts in sexual homicide (researchgate.net)

    The authors reach conclusions (caveated by a need for further research) on the back of 762 cases of sexual murder they studied.

    They define 'unusual acts' as follows:

    Such as carving on the victim, evisceration (i.e., removal of internal organs), skinning the victim, cannibalism and vampirism.

    The authors go on to say:

    Our findings show a strong relationship between body dismemberment, FOI and unusual acts. These extreme crime scene behaviours may just share a common theme: sadism.

    ​Despite a lack of research on unusual and extreme crime scene behaviours, the current study shows that these behaviours—although unusual—can be interpreted as a form of dismemberment.

    The study appears to be concluding that in the event Alice, the C5 and the Pinchin Street murder were committed at the hands of three different people, then not only do you have three men running 'round killing women in the same location and at the same time; you also have three men with the same psychology and motivation, taking pleasure from acts that are all deemed to be forms of dismemberment. It would certainly be the only time in the modern history of England.

    It's worth noting in relation to Annie, that 'carving on the victim' and evisceration are deemed to be borne of the same sadistic design.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

      the face was peeled off. they actually found it and put it on a mannekin head for id purposes. im still on the fence if the 70s victims were tje work of torsoman.
      But the earlier Torso Murders are much more like the late 1800's Torso Murders than the C5.

      Comment


      • #93
        Thank you for sharing the article; it's quite interesting. The article starts by mentioning necrophilia as one of the extreme behaviors. However, in August 1886, a few days after the Paris Torso Murder, the trial of the infamous "vampire of Saint-Ouen" began. This individual had made headlines in March and June of that same year for two cases of grave desecration and sexual acts committed on two newly buried corpses in the Parisian cemetery of Saint-Ouen. If you're interested, there's an English page that provides a brief summary of the events.


        Originally posted by Fleetwood Mac View Post
        The study appears to be concluding that in the event Alice, the C5 and the Pinchin Street murder were committed at the hands of three different people, then not only do you have three men running 'round killing women in the same location and at the same time; you also have three men with the same psychology and motivation, taking pleasure from acts that are all deemed to be forms of dismemberment. It would certainly be the only time in the modern history of England.

        Already two is a lot, so if you add a third... By the way, while browsing the forum, I came across this poll and was quite surprised by the result.

        Click image for larger version

Name:	Capture d’écran 2023-12-09 à 16.12.24.jpg
Views:	183
Size:	241.0 KB
ID:	827076

        If I understood correctly, a third of those who responded believe that the Pinchin Street crime might have been committed by a third party? Percy Shelley wrote, "Hell is a city much like London" (Peter Bell the Third) It's worse than I imagined. ​
        Last edited by Charlie; 12-09-2023, 11:35 PM.
        “There had been a madness of murder in the air. Some red star had come too close to the earth…”
        Oscar Wilde, The Portrait of Dorian Gray

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
          another interesting note in terms of similarities. The tottenham head, the face was disfigured eerily very much like eddowes, and was deposited in a very public and risky place. imho torsoman was responsible for this victim also.
          There is also a glaring logistical similarity between the Tottenham case of 1884 and the Pinchin St Torso...

          The policeman who discovered the large paper parcel containing part of the victim's torso; had just changed shift. It is believed the killer placed the parcel during the shift handover, i.e. the killer was likely aware of the police routines...

          The policeman who found the Pinchin St Torso was also walking that particular beat for the first time.

          It's also interesting that PC Thompson who found Frances Coles was also walking that beat for the very first time, and there's evidence to suggest that PC Thompson disturbed the killer.
          Perhaps Thompson wasn't meant to be passing near the archway at that time and the killer was caught off-guard?


          There's a rather large coincidental pattern emerging there.

          The question is, how would someone be able to know the routines/beats of the police?

          And why?


          RD
          "Great minds, don't think alike"

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by John Wheat View Post

            But the earlier Torso Murders are much more like the late 1800's Torso Murders than the C5.
            On what basis have you drawn this conclusion?

            The two bodies of research undertaken, posted on here, suggest this:

            1) Murders that involve dismembering and mutilating a body are the sign of an offensive murderer, and the dismemberment is an extension of the mutilation, i.e. the same psychology underpins both acts.

            The important point here is that in event you have a dismembered body that hasn't been mutilated elsewhere on the body, then you have a defensive murderer whose dismemberment goal was to hide the identity or conceal the body. A dismembered body lacking mutilation elsewhere and a dismembered body that has been mutilated elsewhere, are likely to have been the victims of two different people. The act of dismemberment taken alone does not connect a series of murders.

            2) This is the most significant point in relation to whether or not the WM could have been the TM and whether or not the WM murdered more than five women. 'Carving on a body', evisceration and removing limbs, are all considered to be forms of dismemberment, i.e. closely related acts borne of a certain and rare psychology. The untrained eye may feel that Alice's mutilation, Catherine's evisceration and the Pinchin Street murder are distinctly different acts. The research suggests otherwise. The untrained eye would assume that dismemberment and evisceration are more extreme acts and such a murderer could not revert to what the untrained eye would see as less extreme, e.g. mutilating the abdomen. The research suggests that is an erroneous assumption.

            Long story short, the latest empirical studies/behavioural science demonstrate that those people who believe in the 'Canonical Five' and do not believe the WM could have been the TM, are not basing that belief on empirical research, nor an understanding of what drives these types of murderers and nor an understanding of the relationship between 'unusual acts' in sexual murders, e.g. 'carving on a body', evisceration and dismemberment: they should link a series of murders as opposed to distance them.

            I would also caution against viewing a statement which includes 'skilled dismemberment' and assuming the perpetrator had medical knowledge. Anthony Hardy, the Camden Ripper, dismembered two of his victims in what was described as a 'skilled manner'. He was a mechanical engineer with no medical background.

            I posted earlier that it would need one of the research people to comment on the 'unusual acts', i.e. are acts of dismemberment divorced from the WM's known acts. I reckon that question has been answered in the second study I posted: they're closely related acts and they're all considered to be forms of dismemberment.

            It follows that the acts themselves do not distance the crimes, rather they link them. That being the case, then what exactly is the basis of an argument that claims there were three different men, in the same location, and at the same time; undertaking what are deemed to be 'unusual acts' and forms of dismemberment (said with Alice, the C5 and the the TM in mind)?

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by Charlie View Post

              Thank you for sharing the article; it's quite interesting. The article starts by mentioning necrophilia as one of the extreme behaviors. However, in August 1886, a few days after the Paris Torso Murder, the trial of the infamous "vampire of Saint-Ouen" began. This individual had made headlines in March and June of that same year for two cases of grave desecration and sexual acts committed on two newly buried corpses in the Parisian cemetery of Saint-Ouen. If you're interested, there's an English page that provides a brief summary of the events.
              Cheers Charlie.

              I'll definitely have a look at some point this week, time is a bit of a barrier.

              The critical point for me is that the latest research suggests the Pinchin Street murder and the WM's generally acknowledged crimes, are not distanced by the acts but rather linked.

              In the event that leg in the 'not the same man' argument falls down, then what is the remaining part of the argument? 'Think I'll have a look at old threads.

              Originally posted by Charlie View Post

              Already two is a lot, so if you add a third...

              If I understood correctly, a third of those who responded believe that the Pinchin Street crime might have been committed by a third party? Percy Shelley wrote, "Hell is a city much like London" (Peter Bell the Third) It's worse than I imagined. ​
              On the other side of the coin, all English cities included slums, poverty and disease that would rival London. There have been 34 acknowledged serial killers in Britain, and London is not at the top of the serial killer production line list despite having a much larger population. I'd suggest that there was nothing about London's conditions in particular that made it more likely to spawn a murderer such as the WM.

              Friedrich Engels, for example, lived in Manchester:

              Every great city has one or more slums, where the working-class is crowded together. True, poverty often dwells in hidden alleys close to the palaces of the rich; but, in general, a separate territory has been assigned to it, where, removed from the sight of the happier classes, it may struggle along as it can. These slums are pretty equally arranged in all the great towns of England, the worst houses in the worst quarters of the towns; usually one- or two-storied cottages in long rows, perhaps with cellars used as dwellings, almost always irregularly built. These houses of three or four rooms and a kitchens form, throughout England, some parts of London excepted, the general dwellings of the working-class. The streets are generally unpaved, rough, dirty, filled with vegetable and animal refuse, without sewers or gutters, but supplied with foul, stagnant pools instead. Moreover, ventilation is impeded by the bad, confused method of building of the whole quarter, and since many human beings here live crowded into a small space, the atmosphere that prevails in these working-men's quarters may readily be imagined.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Fleetwood Mac View Post

                On what basis have you drawn this conclusion?

                The two bodies of research undertaken, posted on here, suggest this:

                1) Murders that involve dismembering and mutilating a body are the sign of an offensive murderer, and the dismemberment is an extension of the mutilation, i.e. the same psychology underpins both acts.

                The important point here is that in event you have a dismembered body that hasn't been mutilated elsewhere on the body, then you have a defensive murderer whose dismemberment goal was to hide the identity or conceal the body. A dismembered body lacking mutilation elsewhere and a dismembered body that has been mutilated elsewhere, are likely to have been the victims of two different people. The act of dismemberment taken alone does not connect a series of murders.

                2) This is the most significant point in relation to whether or not the WM could have been the TM and whether or not the WM murdered more than five women. 'Carving on a body', evisceration and removing limbs, are all considered to be forms of dismemberment, i.e. closely related acts borne of a certain and rare psychology. The untrained eye may feel that Alice's mutilation, Catherine's evisceration and the Pinchin Street murder are distinctly different acts. The research suggests otherwise. The untrained eye would assume that dismemberment and evisceration are more extreme acts and such a murderer could not revert to what the untrained eye would see as less extreme, e.g. mutilating the abdomen. The research suggests that is an erroneous assumption.

                Long story short, the latest empirical studies/behavioural science demonstrate that those people who believe in the 'Canonical Five' and do not believe the WM could have been the TM, are not basing that belief on empirical research, nor an understanding of what drives these types of murderers and nor an understanding of the relationship between 'unusual acts' in sexual murders, e.g. 'carving on a body', evisceration and dismemberment: they should link a series of murders as opposed to distance them.

                I would also caution against viewing a statement which includes 'skilled dismemberment' and assuming the perpetrator had medical knowledge. Anthony Hardy, the Camden Ripper, dismembered two of his victims in what was described as a 'skilled manner'. He was a mechanical engineer with no medical background.

                I posted earlier that it would need one of the research people to comment on the 'unusual acts', i.e. are acts of dismemberment divorced from the WM's known acts. I reckon that question has been answered in the second study I posted: they're closely related acts and they're all considered to be forms of dismemberment.

                It follows that the acts themselves do not distance the crimes, rather they link them. That being the case, then what exactly is the basis of an argument that claims there were three different men, in the same location, and at the same time; undertaking what are deemed to be 'unusual acts' and forms of dismemberment (said with Alice, the C5 and the the TM in mind)?
                Because all the Torso murders involve dismemberment and the C5 don't.

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by John Wheat View Post

                  Because all the Torso murders involve dismemberment and the C5 don't.
                  The research I posted concluded that 'carving on the body', evisceration and removing limbs, are all forms of dismemberment driven by the same psychology, motive and desire. It follows they are linked rather than distanced. That would include Alice.

                  'Just been looking at historical reasons put forward to distance the Pinchin Street murder from the WM and have found the following to be consistent arguments:

                  1) The killer's modus operandi bore little resemblance to the modus operandi of the WM. Swanson saw a marked difference: 'the absence of an attack upon the genitals as in the series of Whitechapel murders beginning at Buck's Row and ending in Miller's Court'. The latest research suggests Swanson was mistaken.

                  2) The WM had the time to remove the head and limbs. Did he have time? How long would it have taken with a knife, particularly a knife without a serrated blade? He would certainly not have had the time to do that with Catherine. It rests with Mary. With Mary, the WM did undertake dismemberment acts as classified by the latest research posted on this thread: ​such as carving on the victim, evisceration and skinning the victim (and possibly more that not we're not aware of such as cannibalism and vampirism). Most knives could not cut through bone, due to the strength of bone and sliding off bone, at least not easily and quickly anyway. On the other hand, I reckon Martha was also a victim of the WM and that murder involved a knife strong enough to cut through the sternum.

                  ​Have I missed anything?

                  I'd like to hear what the people who put together the studies have to say on the WM and the TM. Still, as it stands, I reckon there's enough there to suggest that ruling them out as the same man on the basis of removal of limbs, is a mistake.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Fleetwood Mac View Post

                    The research I posted concluded that 'carving on the body', evisceration and removing limbs, are all forms of dismemberment driven by the same psychology, motive and desire. It follows they are linked rather than distanced. That would include Alice.

                    'Just been looking at historical reasons put forward to distance the Pinchin Street murder from the WM and have found the following to be consistent arguments:

                    1) The killer's modus operandi bore little resemblance to the modus operandi of the WM. Swanson saw a marked difference: 'the absence of an attack upon the genitals as in the series of Whitechapel murders beginning at Buck's Row and ending in Miller's Court'. The latest research suggests Swanson was mistaken.

                    2) The WM had the time to remove the head and limbs. Did he have time? How long would it have taken with a knife, particularly a knife without a serrated blade? He would certainly not have had the time to do that with Catherine. It rests with Mary. With Mary, the WM did undertake dismemberment acts as classified by the latest research posted on this thread: ​such as carving on the victim, evisceration and skinning the victim (and possibly more that not we're not aware of such as cannibalism and vampirism). Most knives could not cut through bone, due to the strength of bone and sliding off bone, at least not easily and quickly anyway. On the other hand, I reckon Martha was also a victim of the WM and that murder involved a knife strong enough to cut through the sternum.

                    ​Have I missed anything?

                    I'd like to hear what the people who put together the studies have to say on the WM and the TM. Still, as it stands, I reckon there's enough there to suggest that ruling them out as the same man on the basis of removal of limbs, is a mistake.
                    I stand by what I have said.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Fleetwood Mac View Post

                      2) The WM had the time to remove the head and limbs. Did he have time? How long would it have taken with a knife, particularly a knife without a serrated blade? He would certainly not have had the time to do that with Catherine. It rests with Mary. With Mary, the WM did undertake dismemberment acts as classified by the latest research posted on this thread: such as carving on the victim, evisceration and skinning the victim (and possibly more that not we're not aware of such as cannibalism and vampirism). Most knives could not cut through bone, due to the strength of bone and sliding off bone, at least not easily and quickly anyway. On the other hand, I reckon Martha was also a victim of the WM and that murder involved a knife strong enough to cut through the sternum.

                      Have I missed anything?
                      You may have, Fleetwood! I have commented on this matter numerous times. We know that it was suggested that the killer of Mary Kelly tried to decapitate her by way of knife. There were deep notches to the vertebrae to make that suggestion.
                      If we then turn to the Torso victims, we have Charles Hebbert saying that there was a progression if the killers work. He pointed out that the Rainham victim had had her spine and neck sawed through, that the Whitehall victim also had her neck sawed through, but that the killer had accomplished severing the spine in two places on Liz Jackson - but had used the saw to take her head off.
                      It was only with the Pinchin Street victim that he managed to decapitate by way of knife. He had then figured out how to get past the anterior lip on the under surface of the vertebra of the neck. That was the progression Hebbert noted - a killer who had not been able to decapitate by way of knife in 1887 and 1888, finally managed to do so in September of 1889, but not before.

                      That information shines a very interesting right on what seems to have been a failed attempt to decapitate Mary Kelly by way of knife!For the longest time, it has been argued that the to killers would not be the same, since the Thames Torso killer could decapitate while the Riper failed to accomplish it. But once we know that NEITHER of them seems to have been able to decapitate by way of knife in 1888, what was suggested to be a dissimilarity suddenly becomes a similarity. One more similarity, that is, to add to all the rest of them, the choice of prostitute victims, the geographical and chronological correlation, the sliced throats, the cuts from sternum to groin, the taken out organs, the cut away abdominal walls, the skilled cutting, and the stolen rings.

                      Once we can also see that we are likely looking at the same driving force behind the deeds, why one earth would we not conclude the obvious?

                      PS. I noted before that you sought for examples of serial killers who sometimes dismembered, sometimes not. Tsutomu Miyazaki is a good example. He killed four young girls, and although he had all the time in the world, he mutilated and dismembered only the first and the last of them. Randy Kraft is another example, of whom it is written on Wikipedia that "many of the victims were burned with a car cigarette lighter, usually around the genitals, chest, and face, and several were found with extensive blunt force trauma to the face and head. In several instances, foreign objects were found inserted into the victims' rectums, while other victims had suffered emasculation, or mutilation and dismemberment.​ Richard Cottingham is another person of interest in this matter. Look him up, and you will see.
                      Last edited by Fisherman; 12-12-2023, 03:41 PM.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                        Once we can also see that we are likely looking at the same driving force behind the deeds, why one earth would we not conclude the obvious?
                        You might see 'the same driving force,' Christer. Others remain entirely unimpressed by this line of thinking.

                        The fact that the Rainham murderer clumsily sawed off the head of his victim does not suggest to me a sexual knife fetishist--it suggest a man with a strictly utilitarian to desire to hide his victim's identity, almost certainly because identifying the victim would put the murderer in the frame.

                        You then launch of into a strange comment about burning people with cigarette lighters, which didn't happen in any of these cases, while failing to note there are dozens and dozens of 'torso' cases worldwide where the victim was decapitated--not to gain the 'sexual release' so near & dear to the morbid imaginations of profilers---but to thwart identification. See the Robert Durst case in Galveston among many, many more.

                        I remain,

                        Unconvinced.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

                          You may have, Fleetwood! I have commented on this matter numerous times. We know that it was suggested that the killer of Mary Kelly tried to decapitate her by way of knife. There were deep notches to the vertebrae to make that suggestion.
                          If we then turn to the Torso victims, we have Charles Hebbert saying that there was a progression if the killers work. He pointed out that the Rainham victim had had her spine and neck sawed through, that the Whitehall victim also had her neck sawed through, but that the killer had accomplished severing the spine in two places on Liz Jackson - but had used the saw to take her head off.
                          It was only with the Pinchin Street victim that he managed to decapitate by way of knife. He had then figured out how to get past the anterior lip on the under surface of the vertebra of the neck. That was the progression Hebbert noted - a killer who had not been able to decapitate by way of knife in 1887 and 1888, finally managed to do so in September of 1889, but not before.

                          That information shines a very interesting right on what seems to have been a failed attempt to decapitate Mary Kelly by way of knife!For the longest time, it has been argued that the to killers would not be the same, since the Thames Torso killer could decapitate while the Riper failed to accomplish it. But once we know that NEITHER of them seems to have been able to decapitate by way of knife in 1888, what was suggested to be a dissimilarity suddenly becomes a similarity. One more similarity, that is, to add to all the rest of them, the choice of prostitute victims, the geographical and chronological correlation, the sliced throats, the cuts from sternum to groin, the taken out organs, the cut away abdominal walls, the skilled cutting, and the stolen rings.

                          Once we can also see that we are likely looking at the same driving force behind the deeds, why one earth would we not conclude the obvious?

                          PS. I noted before that you sought for examples of serial killers who sometimes dismembered, sometimes not. Tsutomu Miyazaki is a good example. He killed four young girls, and although he had all the time in the world, he mutilated and dismembered only the first and the last of them. Randy Kraft is another example, of whom it is written on Wikipedia that "many of the victims were burned with a car cigarette lighter, usually around the genitals, chest, and face, and several were found with extensive blunt force trauma to the face and head. In several instances, foreign objects were found inserted into the victims' rectums, while other victims had suffered emasculation, or mutilation and dismemberment.​ Richard Cottingham is another person of interest in this matter. Look him up, and you will see.
                          That makes sense to me., you make some excellent points.

                          I am a believer in the Ripper and the Torso killer being the same man, or at the very least; 2 men working together & alternating their respective victims across the series.

                          I'd also like to add to the points raised concerning the murder of Kelly...and ask these questions...


                          1) Is the primary reason why the "Ripper" chose to murder Kelly INDOORS because he intended to decapitate her and/or dismember her?

                          2) Did the Ripper use the fire/heat source in Kelly's room specifically to heat his knife to a temperature that could have made the act of decapitation that much easier?

                          3) Did he carry a bag specifically to take away her head?

                          4) Did he deliberately mutilate and obliterate her face because he wasn't able to successfully decapitate her, and so attacked her face out of sheer rage?

                          5) Did he abort the idea of combining INDOOR mutilation and dismemberment after botching the latter with Kelly?

                          6) After failing to decapitate Kelly, did he resort back to isolating his M.O technique for each victim, ergo, EITHER his slaying of Mckenzie & Coles, OR taking women to a private workshop and dismembering them with relatively no time limitations?

                          7) Did he deliberately CHOOSE a different M.O. across the series of victims, as a tactical ploy to confuse the police and to make them believe they were looking for 2 different men?

                          8) Did he CHOOSE to vary his method/technique/weapon of attack, because the idea of experimenting with his victims was a key driving force in the satisfaction he got from the kill?

                          9) Had he spent any time as a convict in Coldbath Fields Prison; which operated a strict "Silent System" that forced prisoners to repeatedly carry out mundane tasks in complete silence, and is THIS the reason why nobody ever heard him kill?

                          10) Did the entire concept of the "Canonical 5" inadvertently stem from the Torso killer's failure to decapitate and dismember Kelly?


                          Lots to ponder


                          RD
                          "Great minds, don't think alike"

                          Comment


                          • Hi,

                            During my research on the Paris Torso, I came across an article that I would like to submit to you regarding an extremely interesting psychiatric case. I don't believe I'm mistaken in saying that this case is not documented in the psychiatric medical records in England, even though it involves a subject of Her Gracious Majesty. The reason being that the individual was interned in France, in Paris (Clinique Sainte-Anne).
                            As this deviates from the topic of this thread, I'm opening a new one. It's located here, under the "Doctors and coroners" section, as it involves our old friend Dr. Thomas Bond. If you have 10 minutes to spare for reading it, I would love to hear your opinions.

                            Thanks
                            “There had been a madness of murder in the air. Some red star had come too close to the earth…”
                            Oscar Wilde, The Portrait of Dorian Gray

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by rjpalmer View Post

                              I remain,

                              Unconvinced.

                              So do I.

                              There are murder cases in which the murderer spent a long time with the victim, such as the London Nudes Murders and, necessarily, the London Torso Murders, but it is quite obvious that the Whitechapel Murderer's mode of operation involved spending a limited amount of time with his victims and then taking trophies away with him.

                              That makes him an unlikely candidate for any of the Torso Murderers.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post


                                So do I.

                                There are murder cases in which the murderer spent a long time with the victim, such as the London Nudes Murders and, necessarily, the London Torso Murders, but it is quite obvious that the Whitechapel Murderer's mode of operation involved spending a limited amount of time with his victims and then taking trophies away with him.

                                That makes him an unlikely candidate for any of the Torso Murderers.
                                I agree with all of this Private Investigator.

                                Cheers John

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X