Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jack and the Thames Torso Murders: A New Ripper?

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
    The group doesn’t have a head - it’s an anarchist group - but they’re ‘armless (except when they get legless).
    A group that hasn´t any legs to stand on is not a very useful group, is it?

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by John G View Post
      I agree. Defensive dismemberers do sometimes remove "flaps of skin". And I think the Torso perpetrator was an offensive/defensive dismemberer.
      Can you name any such dismemberment case where the abdominal wall was removed in flaps, John?

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
        To paraphrase a well-known saying: Diff'rent flaps for diff'rent chaps.
        And we know that the flaps were different inbetween the Chapman/Kelly cases and the Jackson case, because...?

        Oh, I see. We don´t know that. We just make it up.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
          I don't think that serial killing was a new phenomenon at the time. On the contrary, it's probably as old as humankind.
          Not the case in the majority of the torso murders; even in those where it happened, there are eminently (and rather obvious) practical reasons why the dismemberer(s) cut open the abdomen.
          To paraphrase a well-known saying: Diff'rent flaps for diff'rent chaps.
          Hi Sam
          I don't think that serial killing was a new phenomenon at the time. On the contrary, it's probably as old as humankind.
          I think that the rise of modern serial killing probably got its start (or at least took off) as a result of the Industrial revolution, rise of populations in city and towns and the increase of leisure time. and increase of flow of information and the press. sure there were always serial killers but not anything even close to what started in late nineteenth century. and continued to build into the 20th century. to me its like a phase transition ocurred.

          and by the late 1800s early 1900s it had gotten to the point(flow and recording of info and the press) if there was a serial killer we would hear about it. In the decade 1880-1890 you could probably count the number of serial killers operating in the world on one hand. that two such creatures were operating at the same time in the same city who both just happened to be interested in post mortem mutilation is just a tad too much coincidence for me.


          im really excited to read this book and get a Casebook independent view on it.
          "Is all that we see or seem
          but a dream within a dream?"

          -Edgar Allan Poe


          "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
          quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

          -Frederick G. Abberline

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
            A group that hasn´t any legs to stand on is not a very useful group, is it?
            In Glasgow we would call them "Short Arsed Shuggies".
            😉

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
              that two such creatures were operating at the same time in the same city who both just happened to be interested in post mortem mutilation is just a tad too much coincidence for me.
              Very different districts at the opposite ends of the same city, and very different murders committed to very different, albeit overlapping, timescales. I just can't see the comparison, and can easily conceive of separate, independent perpetrators.

              That said, I'm looking forward to the book as well, if only because I know it will be a very interesting read.
              Kind regards, Sam Flynn

              "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                Very different districts at the opposite ends of the same city, and very different murders committed to very different, albeit overlapping, timescales. I just can't see the comparison, and can easily conceive of separate, independent perpetrators.

                That said, I'm looking forward to the book as well, if only because I know it will be a very interesting read.
                thanks Sam
                I have no problem with that at all-of course I disagree-I lean somewhat heavily they were the same man, but there are major differences I concur.

                but I think my earlier point stands re rarity of serial killers in 1880 time frame.

                Do you or anyone knows if there is any numbers on this anywhere?
                "Is all that we see or seem
                but a dream within a dream?"

                -Edgar Allan Poe


                "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                -Frederick G. Abberline

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                  Can you name any such dismemberment case where the abdominal wall was removed in flaps, John?
                  Hi Christer,

                  Dismembering a Body

                  "In addition to this, the chest and abdomen may be opened up and eviscerated. Skin, subcutaneous tissue and muscle may also be removed in square or oblong segments, often as an attempt to remove tattoos, digitis, genitalia and breasts to hinder identification." (Black, Rutty, Hainsworth, Thomson, Criminal Dismemberment: Forensic and Investigative Analysis, 2017)

                  In the aforementioned book, there's actually a large section of skin and subcutaneous tissue, removed as part of the dismemberment process.

                  Of course, with Jackson, the strips of skin and subcutaneous tissue that was removed removed also encompassed the right buttock. As there are no body organs in the buttocks this procedure was not just about evisceration.

                  Throughout the Torso crimes the perpetrator took steps to prevent identification. I would note that a tattoo, for instance, an identifying feature mentioned by Black, Rutty et al. would suggest that the victim was a prostitute, as ordinary women of this period didn't have tattoos.

                  Of course, something else was going on besides removing identifying features. Bizarrely, in the Jackson case, the strips of skin were included with the uterus and placeta. This is a highly unusual serial perpetrator with a ghoulish sense of humour, who was clearly taunting the authorities, as also evidenced by his scattering of body parts, like pieces of a puzzle: even the body parts thrown into The Thames weren't weighed down, ensuring they would float and be found.

                  In any event, the Kelly crime scene was radically different. You could say that the abdomen in that case was removed in section, demonstrating a superficial resemblance. Alternatively, you could say it was just hacked to pieces by a killer showing no skill at all.
                  Last edited by John G; 11-14-2018, 02:27 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                    but I think my earlier point stands re rarity of serial killers in 1880 time frame.
                    But serial killers come in many shapes and sizes, and commit rather different crimes, which is what I see when I compare the torso cases to the JTR murders; I even see the torsos as radically different from the non-canonical Whitechapel Murders, for that matter.
                    Do you or anyone knows if there is any numbers on this anywhere?
                    I don't think there is, but that might be related to something you've already touched upon, namely the explosion in the popular press in the late 19th Century. Before then, there were much fewer newspapers around and those that existed tended to be rather sober in nature; tales of tawdry serial crime and provincial murders were less likely to be reported than they would be in later years.

                    You're quite right in your earlier observation that industrialisation and urbanisation helped bring in the age of the "modern" serial offender, but the Industrial Revolution had kicked in over a century before the Ripper murders, and the populations of Britain's cities and port towns had grown accordingly. Bearing that in mind, it might be argued that, by the latter quarter of the 19th Century, the conditions were ripe for a city like London to spawn two, three or more concurrent serial offenders.
                    Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                    "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                      But serial killers come in many shapes and sizes, and commit rather different crimes, which is what I see when I compare the torso cases to the JTR murders; I even see the torsos as radically different from the non-canonical Whitechapel Murders, for that matter.

                      I don't think there is, but that might be related to something you've already touched upon, namely the explosion in the popular press in the late 19th Century. Before then, there were much fewer newspapers around and those that existed tended to be rather sober in nature; tales of tawdry serial crime and provincial murders were less likely to be reported than they would be in later years.

                      You're quite right in your earlier observation that industrialisation and urbanisation helped bring in the age of the "modern" serial offender, but the Industrial Revolution had kicked in over a century before the Ripper murders, and the populations of Britain's cities and port towns had grown accordingly. Bearing that in mind, it might be argued that, by the latter quarter of the 19th Century, the conditions were ripe for a city like London to spawn two, three or more concurrent serial offenders.
                      thanks Sam
                      It is fascinating isn't it? morbid and sad yes, but interesting nonetheless.
                      "Is all that we see or seem
                      but a dream within a dream?"

                      -Edgar Allan Poe


                      "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                      quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                      -Frederick G. Abberline

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Just to add to my previous post.

                        From Black and Rutty et el., 2017:

                        "In addition to this, the chest and abdomen may be opened and eviscerated."

                        From Dr Hebbert's autopsy of Elizabeth Jackson:

                        "The chest had been opened in front by the mid-line. The upper part of the sternum cut through, and the contents of the chest had been removed"

                        From Black and Rutty et al., 2017.

                        " Skin, subcutaneous tissue and muscle may also be removed in square and oblong segments, often as an attempt to remove tattoos, digits, genitalia and breasts to hinder identification."

                        From Dr Hebbert:

                        "The flaps of skin and subcutaneous tissue consisted of two long, irregular slips taken from the abdominal walls."

                        For a comparison of MJK and the Torso crimes see page 149 of Gordon, 2002:

                        "In this last case [Kelly] There were distinct traces of furious mania. The murderer having plenty of time at his disposal slashed and cut the body in all directions, evidently under the influence of frenzy." See: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...0monro&f=false


                        Monroe then goes on to compare Pinchin Street with MJK.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by John G View Post
                          Hi Christer,

                          Dismembering a Body

                          "In addition to this, the chest and abdomen may be opened up and eviscerated. Skin, subcutaneous tissue and muscle may also be removed in square or oblong segments, often as an attempt to remove tattoos, digitis, genitalia and breasts to hinder identification." (Black, Rutty, Hainsworth, Thomson, Criminal Dismemberment: Forensic and Investigative Analysis, 2017)

                          In the aforementioned book, there's actually a large section of skin and subcutaneous tissue, removed as part of the dismemberment process.

                          Of course, with Jackson, the strips of skin and subcutaneous tissue that was removed removed also encompassed the right buttock. As there are no body organs in the buttocks this procedure was not just about evisceration.

                          Throughout the Torso crimes the perpetrator took steps to prevent identification. I would note that a tattoo, for instance, an identifying feature mentioned by Black, Rutty et al. would suggest that the victim was a prostitute, as ordinary women of this period didn't have tattoos.

                          Of course, something else was going on besides removing identifying features. Bizarrely, in the Jackson case, the strips of skin were included with the uterus and placeta. This is a highly unusual serial perpetrator with a ghoulish sense of humour, who was clearly taunting the authorities, as also evidenced by his scattering of body parts, like pieces of a puzzle: even the body parts thrown into The Thames weren't weighed down, ensuring they would float and be found.

                          In any event, the Kelly crime scene was radically different. You could say that the abdomen in that case was removed in section, demonstrating a superficial resemblance. Alternatively, you could say it was just hacked to pieces by a killer showing no skill at all.
                          Yes, I know Rutty´s book. But the examples here refer to when tissue is removed to get rid of tattoos and such, and there were no tattoos or marks on the three victims we discuss, were there? Plus the killer did not even take the flaps away and destroy them, they were either left with the victim or floated down the Thames, which is why we know that they were not taken away to make identification harder.

                          So that´s a no-go. Plus I want examples, names, John. Cases!

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                            Very different districts at the opposite ends of the same city, and very different murders committed to very different, albeit overlapping, timescales. I just can't see the comparison, and can easily conceive of separate, independent perpetrators.

                            That said, I'm looking forward to the book as well, if only because I know it will be a very interesting read.
                            Same old, same old.

                            Where were the victims procured? You don´t know.

                            There were differences - but how can we sweep the massive and odd similarities under the carpet? We can´t.

                            Can we say that the similarities came about for different reasons? No.

                            So what´s left? Nothing, Gareth.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                              Yes, I know Rutty´s book. But the examples here refer to when tissue is removed to get rid of tattoos and such, and there were no tattoos or marks on the three victims we discuss, were there? Plus the killer did not even take the flaps away and destroy them, they were either left with the victim or floated down the Thames, which is why we know that they were not taken away to make identification harder.

                              So that´s a no-go. Plus I want examples, names, John. Cases!
                              Firstly, I don't accept that there is any certainty that identifying features were not removed from Liz Jackson: the right buttock was targeted for a reason, which certainly wasn't the targeting of body organs!

                              Cases? Well, Karl Danke removed pieces of skin from a victim, which included the abdominal wall. I could also refer you to a couple of cases where victims were cut up into hundreds of pieces, at which point you'll no doubt put a limit on the allowable number of pieces as you're controlling the criteria.

                              And as you're the one asserting the argument, exactly how much research have you done? For instance, 14 cases of offensive dismemberment (lust murders) were investigated by the Institute of Forensic Medicine in Hamburg, between 1959 and 1987 ( Puschel et al, 1987).

                              Have you looked at detailed forensic reports for these cases? Or what about Scandinavia? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9608692

                              Moreover, you can't directly compare a nineteenth century perpetrator with modern cases. I mean, a mutilator or dismemberer of this period could hardly head off to the local DIY store for a set of power tools. Equipped with, say, a Victorian knife, they would have faced more difficult challenges, particularly as "skin is often the hardest tissue to cut" (Rutty, et al., 2017), and in circumstances where the victim was emaciated, i.e. Chapman (because "when a person is very thin the skin at autopsy loses its elasticity . It is more difficult to carefully remove organs when the opening cannot be stretched." ( Phillip Harrison, in Marriott, 2013). A different strategy for cutting up the body may therefore have been required, which suggests a practical purpose rather than ritual and signature.

                              Regarding precedent, consider the geo-profiles. Thus, the Whitechapel street slayings all took place within around 1 square mile, a classic marauder profile. Whereas, in direct contrast, The Torso perpetrator was an obvious commuter offender.

                              Therefore, where is there another example of a serial killer alternating as a JtR-style murderer, slaughtering victims in the street, with a completely different persona as a dismemberer: abducting victims (something JtR didn't do), storing their bodies for up to 8 weeks (something JtR didn't do), preventing identification of victims (something JtR didn't do) and scattering the remains of the victims over a wide geographical area (something JtR didn't do.)?

                              I mean, consider Liz Jackson. The left leg and thigh were found off Battersea; the lower part of the abdomen was found at Horsely-Down; the liver near nine-elms; the upper part of the body, in Battersea Park; the neck and shoulders off Battersea; the right foot and part of leg at Wandsworth; the left leg and foot, Limehouse; the left arm and hand, Bankside; buttocks and bony pelvis, off Battersea; right thigh, Chelsea embankment.

                              In fact, we even see this same sort of macabre game being played out in the earlier dismemberment crimes, with body parts being scattered, "along different parts of the Thames, presenting police with pieces of a puzzle." (Rutty, 2017)

                              As with the storing of the bodies, and the dismemberment process, this was a ritual that was important to the Torso perpetrator, but completely irrelevant to JtR.

                              Against which your argument, with respect, amounts to three very distinct cases, with only superficial similarities: One victim eviscerated by a perpetrator demonstrating skill; one victim hacked to pieces in a frenzy, and another victim who had two strips of skin removed in an area that encompassed the right buttock. And what did the perpetrator do with these pieces of skin? He bundled them up with the uterus and placenta, demonstrating the same ghoulish sense of humour as with the scattering bod the body parts. As for JtR, I don't think he had Mich of a sense of humour, ghoulish or otherwise.
                              Last edited by John G; 11-29-2018, 10:33 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                John G: Firstly, I don't accept that there is any certainty that identifying features were not removed from Liz Jackson: the right buttock was targeted for a reason, which certainly wasn't the targeting of body organs!

                                Here we go! It was not the buttock that Jackson lost, it was part of it, and it came away attached to one of the flaps meaning that whatever identifying features there was on it, it was retrieved for the police to check. They said nothing about any such features.
                                And speaking of loosing part of a buttock - that happened to Kelly too. WHAT a coincidence, eh?
                                Whether the buttock/s were "targetted" or not in these cases, we really cannot say, but I suggest that for your convenience, you may need to accept that it was targetted in one case but not in the other. We really must not start thinking these women were subjected to the same targetting, must we?

                                Cases? Well, Karl Danke removed pieces of skin from a victim, which included the abdominal wall. I could also refer you to a couple of cases where victims were cut up into hundreds of pieces, at which point you'll no doubt put a limit on the allowable number of pieces as you're controlling the criteria.

                                Karl Danke (isn´t it Denke?) cut up the bodies in small pieces that he dried in order to consume them. A very different creature, thus.
                                I was not aware that I control the criteria, but thank you for that, it´s a huge advantage, I´m sure.
                                I could already at this stage ask if this is how you are going to go about your debating? Accusations of me deciding the criteria is not a very benevolent way of debating. But each to his own!

                                And as you're the one asserting the argument, exactly how much research have you done? For instance, 14 cases of offensive dismemberment (lust murders) were investigated by the Institute of Forensic Medicine in Hamburg, between 1959 and 1987 ( Puschel et al, 1987).

                                I´m sure that much material can be dug up that I have not read. When it produces two serial killers and eviscerators in the same area and time, please let me know.

                                Have you looked at detailed forensic reports for these cases? Or what about Scandinavia? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9608692

                                I have read a few Scandinavian studies, but if you wish to proclaim yourself in any way superior or better, then just say so. I think I am pretty well read up on these kinds of cases, but providing the boards with a real expert is always going to be welcome!

                                Moreover, you can't directly compare a nineteenth century perpetrator with modern cases. I mean, a mutilator or dismemberer of this period could hardly head off to the local DIY store for a set of power tools. Equipped with, say, a Victorian knife, they would have faced more difficult challenges, particularly as "skin is often the hardest tissue to cut" (Rutty, et al., 2017, and in circumstances where the victim was emaciated, i.e. Chapman. A different strategy for cutting up the body may therefore have been required, which suggests a practical purpose rather than a ritual.

                                I love the "head off" pun! Intentional, I take it?
                                Otherwise, I fail to see where you are going with this. I can´t remember having spoken about power tool dismemberment. Have I?

                                Regarding precedent, consider the geo-profiles. Thus, the Whitechapel street slayings all took place within around 1 square mile, a classic marauder profile. Whereas, in direct contrast, The Torso perpetrator was an obvious commuter offender.

                                ALL dumpers of dismembered bodies are commuters to a degree, John. It goes with the territory - you kill in one place and dump in another. And I have provided examples of serial killers who have dismembered only on occasion. So what is the problem? The torso killer dumped parts all over London, even in Pinchin Street, so placing him at one fixed spot is impossible. I myself am suggesting that he aimed to give London a wake-up call by dumping many parts in the west so that they would float past the largest metropolis of the era. This killer wanted publicity and recognition!


                                Therefore, where is there another example of a serial killer alternating as a JtR-style murderer, slaughtering victims in the street, with a completely different persona as a dismemberer: abducting victims (something JtR didn't do), storing their bodies for up to 8 weeks (something JtR didn't do), preventing identification of victims (something JtR didn't do) and scattering the remains of the victims over a wide geographical area (something JtR didn't do.)?

                                Why don´t you begin by proving that the torso killer abducted his victims? For example? If you are going to claim it as a certainty?

                                There are lots of examples that are unique among the ranks of serial killers, and so it should not be expected that we can always produce exact parallels. It is another matter to point out that they are so rare so as never to have produced two serial killers who eviscerated in the same time and place. That is another matter altogether, and a very telling one.

                                I mean, consider Liz Jackson. The left leg and thigh were found off Battersea; the lower part of the abdomen was found at Horsely-Down; the liver near nine-elms; the upper part of the body, in Battersea Park; the neck and shoulders off Battersea; the right foot and part of leg at Wandsworth; the left leg and foot, Limehouse; the left arm and hand, Bankside; buttocks and bony pelvis, off Battersea; right thigh, Chelsea embankment.

                                Yes, John, very good! This is exactly what we need to address - if the killer lived by Battersea Bridge, why did he not dump ALL parts from the same spot? Why did he dump some of them on land, for example?
                                I have considered Jackson a whole lot, by the way. And no matter how much considering I spend on her, she always turns up a taken out heart, like Kelly, a taken out uterus, like Kelly and a cut away abdominal wall, like Kelly.
                                Coincidence? No. Not in a million years, John. It ends there, all the quibbling. It goes no further until you can PROVE that the torso man had a different intention than the Ripper - not guess, prove! Until that happens, it´s a very, very, very easy call to make.

                                In fact, we even see this same sort of macabre game being played out in the earlier dismemberment crimes, with body parts being scattered, "along different parts of the Thames, presenting police with pieces of a puzzle." (Rutty, 2017)

                                And your explanation for that is...?

                                As with the storing of the bodies, and the dismemberment process, this was a ritual that was important to the Torso perpetrator, but completely irrelevant to JtR.

                                The Ripper murders did not allow for this course of action. The bodies were not dismembered in those cases, see? And to think that somebody who wanted his work recognized the way the torso killer did could not possibly want it recognized on slightly different merits is simply uninformed. Both series are quite likely to be - at least to a degree - about recognition and putting the fear of God into London.

                                Against which your argument, with respect, amounts to three very distinct cases, with only superficial similarities: One victim eviscerated by a perpetrator demonstrating skill; one victim hacked to pieces in a frenzy, and another victim who had two strips of skin removed in an area that encompassed the right buttock. And what did the perpetrator do with these pieces of skin? He bundled them up with the uterus and placenta, demonstrating the same ghoulish sense of humour as with the scattering bod the body parts. As for JtR, I don't think he had Mich of a sense of humour, ghoulish or otherwise.

                                Yeah? Well, I beg to disagree. His murders were very bit as theatrical as the torso mans, and from where I stand, I can see a common inspiration source to a very significant degree.
                                Apparently, you can´t, but that really can never be my problem.

                                You say that Chapman was a case involving skill - and Gareth says it was not. People disagree.

                                You say that Kelly was a hacking frenzy - and some say that her heart was removed using the Virchow technique. People disagree.

                                You say that Jackson lost part of her buttock - and you forget that Kelly did too.

                                If you ask me, I´d say that all three murders give away a man who had some insight into anatomy - not necessarily a lot, but some - and a lot of fascination for the female body. Given that it was the same man, that was to be expected, of course.


                                Can we take the next step in a slightly less hostile tone? I´m game if you are.
                                Last edited by Fisherman; 11-29-2018, 11:19 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X