Jack the Ripper & The Torso Murders

[Pcdunn]

How confident are we that the Torso killer intended to hide the heads of his victims?

Just because the heads and various other body parts were never found; does that automatically mean that the killer had made a concerted effort to conceal the heads permanently, or is it simply a case of the heads were there to be found, but nobody succeeded in finding them?

Now I imagine the instinctive reaction would be to believe the killer deliberately hid the heads, but it is possible that the killer didn't care either way.


I am asking this question for a reason, as I feel there's more to this.


RD

Well, given the amount of damage and reconstruction London underwent in the 20th century, if no stray skulls have been found over the course of so many years... Wouldn't it seem logical that the heads from the Torso cases were not concealed either aboveground OR belowground?

This suggests to me that they might have been defleshed and sold to medical schools as teaching specimens. (H.H. Holmes had defleshed entire skeletons of his female victims, and sold them assembled to American medical schools.)

[Michael W Richards]

The reason a killer has, who hides the identity of a victim, is invariably that the victim can be linked to himself. Therefore, it is of vital importance that the identity is hidden - so that no link can be made.

That is one possible reason for preventing the identification of a victim, it is not the only possible reason. It could be as simple as a desire to prolong the identification as long as possible, essentially arresting any investigative effort so he could flee. I assume that this angle relates to the absence of heads, which could also be explained by the killer keeping trophies. It could also be he didnt want to see, or didnt see the victims as real people. Just parts. A head can be easily weighted and dropped anywhere in water, easy to bury, or carry. The Torso's themselves present a more difficult disposal problem, in both size and weight.

My point being that there is no evidence here that specifically suggests the killer intend to "hide" the victims identity. But there is more than ample evidence that he intended to cut these women up in private. And perhaps over a period of days or weeks. The delay of gratification, the extended period of time to be actively involved in the crime or the criminal post mortem acts related to the crime seem quite unlike someone who may have spent 5 minutes or less with his victim, in total. I believe the totality of time involved in the committing of these Torso crimes separates the dismemberments from the on the spot killing and cutting in some of the Ripper crimes. If the Ripper killer is satisfied with perhaps a 5 minute experience why would anyone assume he is also fine with something that takes days, weeks to complete?

The crux of all this is, we have some very different factors at play with Jack the Ripper and the fella who made Torso's. Or fellas.

[Fisherman]

How confident are we that the Torso killer intended to hide the heads of his victims?

Just because the heads and various other body parts were never found; does that automatically mean that the killer had made a concerted effort to conceal the heads permanently, or is it simply a case of the heads were there to be found, but nobody succeeded in finding them?

Now I imagine the instinctive reaction would be to believe the killer deliberately hid the heads, but it is possible that the killer didn't care either way.


I am asking this question for a reason, as I feel there's more to this.


RD

As I have said before, my belief is that this killer was a ”killer of strangers”, very likely prostitutes, and so he would have no reason to hide the identities of his victims - likely making for a good comparison with the Ripper murders. There may be various reasons for the missing heads, such as how they were perhaps thrown into the Thames and were weighed down by a higher density than the rest of the body. One of the many other alternatives would be how the killer may have kept the heads as trophies.
There are so many examples of how the torso victims were found with personal marks on them, as well as clothing that offered a direct link to the identity of a victim, that it makes it hard to believe that there was ever any intention of hiding identities.

[The Rookie Detective]

How confident are we that the Torso killer intended to hide the heads of his victims?

Just because the heads and various other body parts were never found; does that automatically mean that the killer had made a concerted effort to conceal the heads permanently, or is it simply a case of the heads were there to be found, but nobody succeeded in finding them?

Now I imagine the instinctive reaction would be to believe the killer deliberately hid the heads, but it is possible that the killer didn't care either way.


I am asking this question for a reason, as I feel there's more to this.


RD

[The Rookie Detective]

Hi Steve.

Not quite sure what you mean about this statement? Could you explain?

I believe the lines are on different branches of the Great Eastern Railway, and not the same line of track.

I am taking Steve's word for it of course ha ha!

RD

[Fisherman]

If we look at Nichols, it does not need any planning, Neil would be in Bucks Row for only a couple of minutes every half hour, no need for planning, to avoid being caught.

Steve

Me, I am more confused by this snippet. Isnīt the fact that Neil was in Bucks Row regularly, every half hour, a very good reason to plan when to use the street for a murder …?

Of course, the schedule leaves lots of room to get lucky, so I agree that we need not predispose any planning. But that does not take away from how it could be a good idea, does it?

[The Rookie Detective]

t.

And Pinchin street and Swallow Gardens are NOT the same stretch of railway, they are close to each other, but are distinctly separate stretches.

Steve

Ah, just to clarify I meant as in the Great Eastern Railway, not literally the same railway line. But that's my fault entirely for not clarifying my point.

Thank you sincerely for pointing that out, because my post reads exactly as you have highlighted, and on that basis my comment on the "same stretch of Railway" was inaccurate, so I accept your point; because in context with my comments, I was factually wrong.

Please allow me to clarify that it's the link with the "Great Eastern Railway" that I intended to highlight in my post.


RD

[jerryd]

And Pinchin street and Swallow Gardens are NOT the same stretch of railway, they are close to each other, but are distinctly separate stretches.

Steve

Hi Steve.

Not quite sure what you mean about this statement? Could you explain?

[Elamarna]

The killer chose the time between Pennett's beat to dump the torso. The killer must have been aware of the beat, because even though it was Pennett's first, the beat was a "REGULAR" beat, meaning that another officer had walked the same beat before on many occasions.
Interestingly, Pennett was only put onto that particular beat by his superior officer shortly before his beat started earlier that evening.

I have always wondered whether that was significant.

It's also a striking coincidence that PC Ernest Thompson was also on his first beat on the night he found Frances Coles...And on the very same stretch of Great Eastern Railway as the Pinchin Street Torso.

2 Railway Arches
The same stretch of Railway
2 Police officers on their maiden beat each "discover" the Pinchin St Torso and Frances Coles respectively.

It's almost as though the killer had orchestrated when and where to kill/dump the torso.

There's also strong evidence to explain HOW and WHY the Ripper wasn't caught mutilating Eddowes, Nichols, and McKenzie...he timed everything perfectly and that takes a lot of planning and foresight.

RD

Not meaning to throw a dampened RD, but just an alternative.

While it's indeed possible that the killer intentionally dumped the Torso inbetween rounds of Pennet's beat, it's also possible that it was not planned and it just took place during the gap.

If we look at Nichols, it does not need any planning, Neil would be in Bucks Row for only a couple of minutes every half hour, no need for planning, to avoid being caught.

And Pinchin street and Swallow Gardens are NOT the same stretch of railway, they are close to each other, but are distinctly separate stretches.

Steve

[The Rookie Detective]

I was using Pennett's own testimony.

"I went on duty at 10 o'clock on Monday night. Nothing attracted my attention that was unusual. I was on a regular beat during the night and morning. I had to go through Pinchin-street about every half-hour. I entered it from Christian-street and Backchurch-lane. I occasionally turned down Frederick-street to where the stables were. I then returned to Pinchin-street. Once or twice I cut it short, and simply went into Backchurch-lane. About 25 minutes past 5, I came from the direction of Christian-street to Pinchin-street. I went across the road from the northern side, in the direction of the railway arch, and had no particular reason for so doing."

Which sounds to me as if Pennett did not check the arch every time he made a circuit. Pennett also testified that it was his first day on that beat, which likely meant he spent some time familiarizing himself with the route.

The killer chose the time between Pennett's beat to dump the torso. The killer must have been aware of the beat, because even though it was Pennett's first, the beat was a "REGULAR" beat, meaning that another officer had walked the same beat before on many occasions.
Interestingly, Pennett was only put onto that particular beat by his superior officer shortly before his beat started earlier that evening.

I have always wondered whether that was significant.

It's also a striking coincidence that PC Ernest Thompson was also on his first beat on the night he found Frances Coles...And on the very same stretch of Great Eastern Railway as the Pinchin Street Torso.

2 Railway Arches
The same stretch of Railway
2 Police officers on their maiden beat each "discover" the Pinchin St Torso and Frances Coles respectively.

It's almost as though the killer had orchestrated when and where to kill/dump the torso.

There's also strong evidence to explain HOW and WHY the Ripper wasn't caught mutilating Eddowes, Nichols, and McKenzie...he timed everything perfectly and that takes a lot of planning and foresight.

RD

[Fisherman]

I was using Pennett's own testimony.

"I went on duty at 10 o'clock on Monday night. Nothing attracted my attention that was unusual. I was on a regular beat during the night and morning. I had to go through Pinchin-street about every half-hour. I entered it from Christian-street and Backchurch-lane. I occasionally turned down Frederick-street to where the stables were. I then returned to Pinchin-street. Once or twice I cut it short, and simply went into Backchurch-lane. About 25 minutes past 5, I came from the direction of Christian-street to Pinchin-street. I went across the road from the northern side, in the direction of the railway arch, and had no particular reason for so doing."

Which sounds to me as if Pennett did not check the arch every time he made a circuit. Pennett also testified that it was his first day on that beat, which likely meant he spent some time familiarizing himself with the route.

Pennet was new on the beat. He told the inquest how he, on the round preceding the one when he found the torso, had also checked the arch, enabling him to be certain that the torso was not on place at that stage.
So we are informed about two occasions, following on each other, and on each occasion PC Pennet checked the arch.

That does not make for any truly good reason to suggest that the torso could have lain around for weeks before somebody eventually stumbled upon it. On the contrary, it suggests that the torso was always going to be found very quickly.

Of course, it can be suggested - anything can be suggested, as always - that Pennet would have checked the vault twice within an hour on back to back rounds, only to then revert to checking it every fortnight afterwards. But it sounds distinctly unrealistic to me, and seerms to be in utter conflict with the evidence we have at hand.

Painful though it may feel, isnīt it better to acknowledge that evidence? Not easier - just better.

[Fiver]

Hi RD.

No need to acknowledge me, and I am certainly not in the same category as Debs. I'm in the same boat as you, I learned almost everything I know about the torso cases from her research.

Something was going on. I wanted to mention the Pinchin Street case as well. Someone said earlier it was by chance the PC stumbled upon her body in the archway otherwise who knows how long before it would have been found.

I was using Pennett's own testimony.

"I went on duty at 10 o'clock on Monday night. Nothing attracted my attention that was unusual. I was on a regular beat during the night and morning. I had to go through Pinchin-street about every half-hour. I entered it from Christian-street and Backchurch-lane. I occasionally turned down Frederick-street to where the stables were. I then returned to Pinchin-street. Once or twice I cut it short, and simply went into Backchurch-lane. About 25 minutes past 5, I came from the direction of Christian-street to Pinchin-street. I went across the road from the northern side, in the direction of the railway arch, and had no particular reason for so doing."

Which sounds to me as if Pennett did not check the arch every time he made a circuit. Pennett also testified that it was his first day on that beat, which likely meant he spent some time familiarizing himself with the route.

[FrankO]

I never put any words in your mouth, Frank, but of course, if you felt I did, I will readily apologize.

Apoligy accepted, Christer. Moving on!...

And yes, there are more important things than Ripper related quibbles (and oh yes, I intentionally called the Torso series Ripper related there …)

I got that, respect it and wouldn't have expected anything else, really.

Vi ses absolut, och jag ser alltid fram emot det!

Same here!

[Fisherman]

Well, Christer, it would have been nice & usefull if you'd just written just this, instead of putting words in my mouth.

You did a good job hiding all this then, my Swedish friend, because your previous post to me certainly didn't come across that way. So, thanks for clearing that up.

As to your last sentence, I hope you speak for yourself, but the main point is that we agree on there being no reason to be sensitive and that we've cleared things up. Discussing Torso and/or Ripper related things if fine, but there are more important things in life than squabbling over them.

Vi ses & the best,
Frank

I never put any words in your mouth, Frank, but of course, if you felt I did, I will readily apologize. On my last point I speak for anybody who is perhaps too sensitive about all of this, because it produces misunderstandings that are extremely improductive. I myself am at times guilty of it, certainly. Embarrasingly so at times.
And yes, there are more important things than Ripper related quibbles (and oh yes, I intentionally called the Torso series Ripper related there …)

Vi ses absolut, och jag ser alltid fram emot det!

[FrankO]

What I regard as futile is if somebody believes that he or she is able to establish the underlying motives for the killer to use a specific dumping location, nothing else.

Well, Christer, it would have been nice & usefull if you'd just written just this, instead of putting words in my mouth.

I would not claim that you believe that you can accomplish this. I am instead quite certain that you would never do that. And so, Frank, I may have picked up on how you reason to a larger degree that you give me credit for.

You did a good job hiding all this then, my Swedish friend, because your previous post to me certainly didn't come across that way. So, thanks for clearing that up.

This is not to say that discussing the matter of the killers motivations must be fruitless, and I do so myself. It seemingly can make us a tad sensitive, but there is really no reason for that.

As to your last sentence, I hope you speak for yourself, but the main point is that we agree on there being no reason to be sensitive and that we've cleared things up. Discussing Torso and/or Ripper related things if fine, but there are more important things in life than squabbling over them.

Vi ses & the best,
Frank