Jack the Ripper & The Torso Murders

[John Wheat]

Mackenzie couldn’t have been a victim because Druitt was dead George.

I find it unlikely Mackenzie was a Ripper victim.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi RD,

I agree with your thinking on this matter. If McKenzie had been murdered on the same night as Chapman, it may well have been postulated that Jack was unsatisfied after being interrupted and went of to locate and murder Chapman as a result. Stride had her throat cut, and McKenzie was stabbed in the throat (as was Tabram), but this difference may have revolved around the victim's reaction, or lack there of, to the sudden threat. I wonder about the logic of including Stride as a JtR victim, but excluding McKenzie. As you say, it seems to be a matter of timing.

Keep up the good work.

Cheers, George

Mackenzie couldn’t have been a victim because Druitt was dead George.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Some excellent points as always Herlock and I appreciate and respect your views.

Regarding Jackson; she did spend time in Whitechapel.

When she and John (Jack) Faircloth left Ipswich, they headed directly for Whitechapel, rather than head to the Chelsea area.

The idea that Jackson had no connection to Whitechapel is not accurate.

The question is; why choose Whitechapel?

Faircloth had finished his contractual work in Ipswich, in which they had stayed for around 4 months. This is also the location where Jackson conceived.

They then returned to London, but went to Whitechapel, where they stayed for at least few days before moving to Millwall in the docklands, just yards from the Thames.

I would anticipate that one of the reasons for going from Ipswich to Whitechapel, may have been to try and seek an abortion.

While I don't believe that Jackson was killed during a botched abortion, I do believe that her pregnancy was her driving force.


RD

Thanks RD, I wasn’t aware of that.

[GBinOz]

That's a very interesting point you raise there Frank in your last paragraph.
I have said on several occasions on this forum that the only reason why McKenzie wasn't considered a "Canonical" victim of the Ripper, comes down to the timing of her murder.

Had she have been murdered BEFORE Kelly, then she would have been included, or even more if she has been murdered between Nichols and Chapman.

Her murder is most like Nichols in that regard.

However, because her murder occurred after Kelly, she has never been officially included as a canonical victim.

For me, because she was killed AFTER Kelly, it almost feels like the killer had a reset and reverted back to the murder of Nichols in his application.

RD

Hi RD,

I agree with your thinking on this matter. If McKenzie had been murdered on the same night as Chapman, it may well have been postulated that Jack was unsatisfied after being interrupted and went of to locate and murder Chapman as a result. Stride had her throat cut, and McKenzie was stabbed in the throat (as was Tabram), but this difference may have revolved around the victim's reaction, or lack there of, to the sudden threat. I wonder about the logic of including Stride as a JtR victim, but excluding McKenzie. As you say, it seems to be a matter of timing.

Keep up the good work.

Cheers, George

[The Rookie Detective]

So….Torso discovered on 2nd October and had been placed there 2 or 3 days earlier. A man called Lawrence was in there on the 29th

You suggest a murder date of sometime between early August to early September which encompasses the murders of Tabram, Nichols and Chapman (although I’m unsure as to how you arrive at those dates as there doesn’t appear to be any indication of TOD from the Doctors [maybe it was estimated elsewhere?])

You believe that the kill was on the 24th August but this is only a hypothesis. There’s nothing wrong with a hypothesis RD but we can’t confirm or dismiss on the basis of one.

So we clearly have a Torso murder occurring within the Whitechapel series which means that the killer (if there was a killer - and we can’t be certain of this) had a premises where he could kill and dismember victims which he chose not to use for the Whitechapel victims. He moved from the highly risky killing of prostitutes outdoors and leaving them where they were certain to be found almost straight away to taking them (presumably of their own volition?) to a premises and killing them with little or no chance of discovery.

Yes, there is always an element of risk in dumping wrapped body parts but the person that did it would have had time for caution; to eliminate as far as possible the risk of being discovered. I’d also ask how certain it would have been for ‘packages’ dumped in the Thames to surface at some point? Would he have considered it a possibility of a package staying at the bottom of the Thames? I don’t know but it introduces an element of chance where’s the Whitehall and Pinchin Street torsos could fail to have been found so this introduces an element of inconsistency within the Torso series. Did he want them found or not? Or is it possible that these torsos weren’t all dumped by the same person?

It’s a minor point but the fact that Elizabeth Jackson was from the West End also adds an element of doubt as to a connection with the Whitechapel murders. Of course she could have ventured into Whitechapel for some reason or the killer could have gone to Chelsea but the Whitechapel murders were all within a small area suggesting that the killer wasn’t a man that roamed any distance for victims.


Can I say with total certainty that the two series weren’t connected. No (but I can’t prove that Lewis Carroll wasn’t the ripper either) All that we can do is to stand back and compare the two ‘series.’ We can’t prove that the torsos were part of a series. It’s far, far easier to state that the Whitechapel murders were though (yes we can certainly question Tabram, Stride, Mackenzie and Coles.) The differences between the torsos and the WM are obvious and telling. I’m not in any way criticising research into the subject but the dangers are obvious and I think that often caution is mistaken for negativity or a desire for the status quo. It’s not. It’s a precaution against the joining up of random dots to make something fit a theory. To a far worse extent we’ve recently seen on here the use of anagrams and lines drawn between locations. There’s nothing wrong with caution imo.

I see nothing to connect these two ‘series,’ and I’m far from convinced that the torsos were particularly a part of a series.

Some excellent points as always Herlock and I appreciate and respect your views.

Regarding Jackson; she did spend time in Whitechapel.

When she and John (Jack) Faircloth left Ipswich, they headed directly for Whitechapel, rather than head to the Chelsea area.

The idea that Jackson had no connection to Whitechapel is not accurate.

The question is; why choose Whitechapel?

Faircloth had finished his contractual work in Ipswich, in which they had stayed for around 4 months. This is also the location where Jackson conceived.

They then returned to London, but went to Whitechapel, where they stayed for at least few days before moving to Millwall in the docklands, just yards from the Thames.

I would anticipate that one of the reasons for going from Ipswich to Whitechapel, may have been to try and seek an abortion.

While I don't believe that Jackson was killed during a botched abortion, I do believe that her pregnancy was her driving force.


RD

[Pcdunn]

^"Two! Two! Two mints in one!" I remember. . . But in this case, two murderers in one! (Bah, humbug!)

[Paddy Goose]

Charles Dodson is "Lewis Carroll"

tjat does it for me
he uzed 2 namse so he was torsoripperman in my onion

its 2 in 1

[Pcdunn]

with all due respect your "suspects" are a joke. and universally considered as such. ill give you donston as a possible long shot. who the heck is charles dodson and john willams?!! lol
like i said the only valid suspect that fits the bill is lech.

Charles Dodson is "Lewis Carroll", another of the suspicious authors people have suggested for JtR.

[John Wheat]

Stronger suspects than Bury too, dare I say.

No your totally wrong there.

[GBinOz]

Hi Fiver,

I think that Deeming, Hyams, and Levy are stronger suspects than Lechmere.

Stronger suspects than Bury too, dare I say.

[GBinOz]

um i think it was that people had cat meats shops where they cut up meat. or torsos. lol

but maybe her 16 year old son was torso man! he would fit the age profile of the earlier ones at -1 years old!

Hi Abby,

The son referred to as a street vendor was actually her elder son, James. The following is from here:

https://www.casebook.org/ripper_media/book_reviews/non-fiction/cjmorley/79.html

James Hardiman was born in Mile End, Whitechapel, on December 1859 the son of a cobbler. His mother Harriett, who is listed in the 1891 census as 52 years of age and widowed, occupied and sold cats meat (pieces of horse flesh on a skewer for a farthing) from the ground floor front room of 29 Hanbury Street. Described as a well proportioned woman, she lived there with her 16 year old son William.
James Hardiman lived, at one time, at 29 Hanbury Street, though at the time of the murder was living around the corner at 13 Heneage Street. He was a cat meat seller and purveyor of horseflesh. His daughter Harriett, had died on 18 June 1888, from emaciation arising from nerve damage, caused by untreated congenital syphilis contracted from her mother. His wife Sarah, who was born in Birmingham, died on 15 September 1888. James Hardiman died on 22 December 1891 at 29 Hanbury Street, from tuberculosis at the age of 32.

Cheers, George

[Lewis C]

If the Torsoman was the Ripper and the 1873 murders were done by the Torsomanm that eliminates a lot of suspects, but it doesn't leave Charles Lechmere as the only possibility. Using the main suspect page, we see that in 1873 Charles Dodson was 41, Thomas Cream was 23, Frederick Deeming was 31, Karl Feigenbaum was 44, Hyam Hyams was 18, Jacob Levy was 17, James Maybrick was 35, Michael Ostrog was 40, William Gull was 57, Robert D’Onston Stephenson was 32, Alois Szemeredy was 33, Nikolay Vasiliev was 25, and John Williams was 33.

Hi Fiver,

Some of the suspects you mentioned here can be rejected for other reasons, but if JtR didn't commit any of the torso murders, I think that Deeming, Hyams, and Levy are stronger suspects than Lechmere. My info has Deeming as 20 in 1873, with the other two at 17 and 18. I don't know what we can assume the minimum age is for a viable suspect, but I'll throw some other names into the mix. In 1873, Edward Buckley was 19, Charles LeGrande was 23, and Oswald Puckridge and Thomas Bernardo were older than Lechmere. We don't know when George Hutchinson was born, but he might have been as old as 18 in 1873. I'd say that with the possible exception of Bernardo, everyone that I've mentioned is a viable Ripper suspect, and even Bernardo I wouldn't reject out of hand.

[Fiver]

really john? really? hes a joke suspect along the lines of ostrog and maybrick and gull and others in fivers list?!?! really?
a man seen in tje middle of the night hovering near polly nichols freshly killed body and could very well have been her killer?
a man who had a material discrepency with the pc on the scene?
a man who we know walked close to tje murders sites on a daily basis?

It's not my list, it's the Casebook's list.

Charles Lechmere was seen standing in the middle of the street, not hovering over Polly Nichols body.

Robert Paul is the first person recorded as disagreeing with PC Mizen. Charles Lechmere confirmed Paul's testimony in court.

Robert Paul walked past the murder sites of Nichols and Chapman on a daily basis as did dozens, possibly hundreds of other men. But Chapman was killed after Paul and Lechmere started work. None of the other victims were killed near a place that Lechmere would have passed on a daily basis. Stride and Eddowes were killed at a time that would have required Lechmere to stay up 23+ hours or get up 3+ hours early on his only day off.

Lechmere is a joke suspect. Not as big a joke as Charles Dodgson or William Gull, but still a joke.

[Elamarna]

Sorry but Jacob Levy is not universally considered a joke Abby.

Steve

Agreed completely, with the possible exception of Hyam Hyams, I am not convinced the current book, One Armed Jack, as the correct Hyam Hyams btw.

Steve

[The Rookie Detective]

Hi Abby,

I don't rule her out as a Ripper victim (I'm a guy that doesn't easily rule things, if at all), but I have some serious doubts about her as a Ripper victim. But if I had to choose, then I would certainly not put her in Torso Man's basket. But I have a feeling you knew or guessed this already.


If we're supposing that McKenzie was a Ripper victim and the Ripper and Torso Man were one and the same, then I might see it like that, too. But it's perhaps an 'if' (or 2) too many for me. I see the fact that the Ripper opened up the abdomens of all 4 of the victims he mutilated in the C5 as a sort of benchmark. Had MacKenzie been an early victim, like Tabram, then I'd probably included her as a Ripper victim more easily. But that's just me.

The best,
Frank

That's a very interesting point you raise there Frank in your last paragraph.
I have said on several occasions on this forum that the only reason why McKenzie wasn't considered a "Canonical" victim of the Ripper, comes down to the timing of her murder.

Had she have been murdered BEFORE Kelly, then she would have been included, or even more if she has been murdered between Nichols and Chapman.

Her murder is most like Nichols in that regard.

However, because her murder occurred after Kelly, she has never been officially included as a canonical victim.

For me, because she was killed AFTER Kelly, it almost feels like the killer had a reset and reverted back to the murder of Nichols in his application.

RD