Jack the Ripper & The Torso Murders

[Abby Normal]

Did he propose it before CallMeBill in 2018?

hello fiver
hawley was talking about the ripper, fish applied the idea to torsoman or the torsoripper. another original idea was the THEORY that torsoripper didnt learn how to decapitate by knife until pinchin, which would explain why he couldnt take the heads off chapman and kelly(if indeed that was what he was trying to do). Fishs ideas pertaining to the torsoripper, including these and many others and also applying it to a single suspect is an over all THEORY. One that ties all together logically and reasonably and done with a hell of alot of time and effort. he dosnt deserve to be ridiculed and insulted by calling his THEORY a myth. cmon man.

[John Wheat]

I thought we were discussing the facts Fish, your unwavering belief that the 2 series are in reality just 1 longer series. Your conviction is admirable, however your supporting evidence..not so much. Were the Torso murders in 1888-89 the only time in history, to that point, that we see these kinds of acts? No. They are not. Are there any murders prior to 1888 that seem very similar to the ones pinned on Jack the Ripper? Lets just say, to the murder of Annie Chapman? Not really. Some of those murders were quite unique, but dismemberment, again, not so much.

Your suggestion that the 2 series must be by one man doesnt account for very similar Torso murders that pre-date the Ripper crimes by over a decade. They could have been by the same man in 1888. Who knows? So you want to put on the table that you believe a killer who may have dismembered a few times over the course of 14 years from 1873 until 1888 suddenly begins a whole new rain of terror and style of murder, while still continuing on with his old habits?

I find a lot of Ripperology embraces the Marvel Universe philosophy, where the practically impossible is held in the highest regard.

Not only are the previous Thames Torso murders more similar than the Ripper murders to the later Torso Murders but the Paris Torso murders are more similar too.

[Pcdunn]

You may well be right, PC. The impression I've always had was that the thigh thrown over railings into the garden of the Shelley estate, the Whitehall and the Pinchin Street torso were all attempts by the Torso killer to be more interesting, shocking, intriguing or something like that rather than anything else. I can't help but wonder if he dumped one of his torsos in Pinchin Street for the exact reason you suggest: that he resented the publicity and, with it, the notoriety that the Ripper was getting and he was not.

Had the Pinchin Street torso actually been dumped "smack bang in the heart of Ripper territory", as some have it, instead of just outside of it, and if the Ripper victims had been killed a great deal more to the west, then I'd be more prepared to believe there was just the one perpetrator.

All the best,
Frank

Thanks, FrankO. I agree with your points entirely. I had read a book on Victorian murders and crimes, and saw that bodies (whole or dismembered) disposed of in rivers wasn't all that uncommon. Some of the Torsos cases seem fully ordinary defensive crimes, but the ones you mention-- including Pinchin-- seem deliberately competing with Ripper cases for newspaper ink.

The Paris Torso cases are intriguing, in case their perpuerator visited London, too?

[Michael W Richards]

not only is this incorrect on many levels, its a low blow by you and MR and very regrettable.

its an insulting misnomer to begin with, because fishs ideas is a theory or theories.you do know the difference between a myth and a theory I hope? And fish has come up with alot of original research and theory on his own.

one of the most original being that a possible inspiration/ motive by torsoman was the anatomical venus displays in the local museums, which closed right around the time the first torso victims started to surface.

A new play had opened in 1888 in London, Jeykll and Hyde was playing at the Lyceum during the Ripper murders, does that then constitute another art inspired theory about Jack? A theory suggests a possible solution while acknowledging it is unproven, a Myth perpetuates the unproven. ""The one myth there ever was, was that the Torso killer was another man than the Ripper." That quote seems to indicate that this theory has been upgraded to fact by the author. Something that is categorically incorrect.

Myth: A traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation.

Theory: An idea or set of ideas that is intended to explain facts or events.

I have no problem with theories per se, I have some unproven ones about some of these cases myself. What I do have some concern about when Theories are presented as being viable Solutions without the required substantive evidence to enable that transition. This whole premise is interesting, but it doesnt take hold using the known facts in these cases. He has a theory, but it doesnt hold up under closer examination.

[FrankO]

Hmmm...I may be influenced by too many episodes of "Criminal Minds," but what if leaving the Pinchin Torso in the Ripper's area was more of a *challenge* by the Torso Killer? Perhaps he resented the publicity JtR was getting in the papers?

You may well be right, PC. The impression I've always had was that the thigh thrown over railings into the garden of the Shelley estate, the Whitehall and the Pinchin Street torso were all attempts by the Torso killer to be more interesting, shocking, intriguing or something like that rather than anything else. I can't help but wonder if he dumped one of his torsos in Pinchin Street for the exact reason you suggest: that he resented the publicity and, with it, the notoriety that the Ripper was getting and he was not.

Had the Pinchin Street torso actually been dumped "smack bang in the heart of Ripper territory", as some have it, instead of just outside of it, and if the Ripper victims had been killed a great deal more to the west, then I'd be more prepared to believe there was just the one perpetrator.

All the best,
Frank

[The Rookie Detective]

Jerry... just in case, here's his signature from the 1921 census...




Just wondering if there's any similarity to any of the alleged written correspondences.


RD

[The Rookie Detective]

Not that I have found Abby. John Arnold sold papers at Charing Cross though, which was fairly close to Scotland Yard. Never know who runs into whom?

Hi Jerry (and Abby)


According to the 1921 census, Frederick J Wildbore was living at 133 Harbut Road, Clapham Junction, Battersea.

Harbut Road was nearer to Wandworth Bridge.


I noticed on the Forums site, that there is a mention of Frederick Wildbore being possibly employed by the Met Police in the 1911 census?

Well in the 1921 census, he is listed as a (retired) "senior office carpenter"...although in the "Employer" column, it does indeed state that he "Receives of Metropolitan Police."

That confirms that he had a connection to the Met and that they paid him for his services.

I find his connection to the Police rather unusual considering he is the man who pointed out the torso in the Whitehall mystery.

I must say Jerry, your research on this is exceptional and I have looked through the links you supplied.

Abby was right; I've had a field day looking through all that data.


Please keep it coming ha ha!


RD

[Michael W Richards]

The one myth there ever was, was that the Torso killer was another man than the Ripper.

I have never tried to create any myth in any way relating the these cases. Claiming that is trying to create a myth.

Try and discuss the factual matters instead, Michael. It lowers the blood pressure and makes for a much more useful debate.

I thought we were discussing the facts Fish, your unwavering belief that the 2 series are in reality just 1 longer series. Your conviction is admirable, however your supporting evidence..not so much. Were the Torso murders in 1888-89 the only time in history, to that point, that we see these kinds of acts? No. They are not. Are there any murders prior to 1888 that seem very similar to the ones pinned on Jack the Ripper? Lets just say, to the murder of Annie Chapman? Not really. Some of those murders were quite unique, but dismemberment, again, not so much.

Your suggestion that the 2 series must be by one man doesnt account for very similar Torso murders that pre-date the Ripper crimes by over a decade. They could have been by the same man in 1888. Who knows? So you want to put on the table that you believe a killer who may have dismembered a few times over the course of 14 years from 1873 until 1888 suddenly begins a whole new rain of terror and style of murder, while still continuing on with his old habits?

I find a lot of Ripperology embraces the Marvel Universe philosophy, where the practically impossible is held in the highest regard.

[Fisherman]

That's only correct because you borrow myths from other people instead of creating your own myths.

Except perhaps for the Ley Line myth. Everything else seems to be borrowed from Von Stow or early TorsoRipper theorists.

It is perfectly true that I have made use of finds that were made by other theorists in my work. That is something that anybody who knows the two cases will be quite aware of. I think you will also find that this is something universal when it comes to presenting a theory on the Ripper case - we read and absorb what earlier research has brought to light, and then we make our own interpretation of it.

In my case, it has resulted in how I have been part of a presentation of the Ripper case in St Johns Church, Bethnal Green, how I have been involved in making the Missing Evidence documentary, how I have been a podcast guest, and how I have written my book Cutting Point and had it published. I am proud and happy about how the book has been rated very highly by the various sites that have reviewed it on the net.
Along this way, none of the people I mentioned before - the ones who are well read up on the case, have made any allegations about how my only contribution to the field has lain in recycling other theorists work. It is only you, Fiver.

Then again, I am perhaps not all that sure about how well read up you are. You were blissfully unaware about how the Torso murders involved the cutting of the abdomens of the Rainham victim and Liz Jackson open all the way down, just like in four of the canonical Ripper murders.
With that level of insight lack, it is understandable if you get things wrong. And when you add that you believe that the fact that the dismembered torso victims were not found displayed on their backs, is another thing that tells us that the two series would not have had the same originator, I tend to despair about your chances of ever getting these things right at all.

What I want to say with all of this (and I was uncertain whether or not to say anything at all) is that in the choice of playing my role and yours, I genuinely believe that - regardless of how I to a large degree have based my theory about the case on reading up on other theorists and researchers work - I have had the good fortune to play the less sad role of the two of us.

Merry Christmas, Fiver!

[jerryd]

I would suspect John Arnold was informed by somebody in the know at least. He may have been the subject of this incident in 1888 with the Whitehall torso I just posted. It all sounds too familiar.

[jerryd]

Here is one report on it Abby.

Sheffield Evening Telegraph
11 October 1888

AN EXTRAORDINARY STORY

An extraordinary story is going the round of journalistic circles in connection with the mysterious discovery on the Thames Embankment. It will be remembered that the woman's remains were found on the Monday afternoon of last week. The previous evening, however, a man went to most of the daily newspaper offices, saw the respective subeditors[?] and inquired if they had heard of a woman's body being discovered on the Embankment. The man evidently expected remuneration, but, in accordance with practice, was required to call again after inquiries had been made. Reporters were despatched in hot haste to Westminster, and calls were made at all the police stations and other likely quarters, but without result, no discovery of the kind reported having been made. In less than twenty-four hours the remains of the unknown woman were found between the Embankment and Whitehall at the spot previously described. If this reported discovery was a hoax, and a strange coincidence, it is very singular indeed. Moreover, the man who called at the newspaper offices did not call a second time.

[Abby Normal]

Not that I have found Abby. John Arnold sold papers at Charing Cross though, which was fairly close to Scotland Yard. Never know who runs into whom?

thanks Jer

the prediction of the other torso was anonymous correct?

so if arnold foretold a torso, wouldnt it be reasonable to suspect arnold of being the killer?

[Fiver]

a post in creative writing that had all of seven responses that none including op mention anything about the torsos.

e

Fisherman claims the Torso Killer was the Ripper. Did Fisherman propose the Anatomical Venus theory before Michael Hawley published it in The New Independent Review in 2012?

Or how about Hawley's 2013 article in Ripperologist 130? In it, Hawley noted that public anatomy museums in England were shut down in 1873 under the Obscene Publications Act of 1857.

[jerryd]

hi jerry
is there any connection between wildbore and arnold?

Not that I have found Abby. John Arnold sold papers at Charing Cross though, which was fairly close to Scotland Yard. Never know who runs into whom?

[Abby Normal]

Hi RD.

I think the answer is much simpler than that. The fact that word got out to John Arnold that a body was going to be found in Backchurch Lane was an announcement in itself. With the same affair happening the day before the Whitehall torso was found, I'd say this person highly desired the bodies to be found, for whatever reason?

hi jerry
is there any connection between wildbore and arnold?