Jack and the Thames Torso Murders: A New Ripper?

[John G]

Unfortunately didn't think my last post was hostile! It certainly wasn't intended to be, although as we take diametrically opposed views there is bound to be a large degree of disagreement.

Firstly, an overview. Serial killers can sometimes elaborate or evolve their ritualistic behaviour. For instance, Schlesinger refers to an offender who began with post mortem mutilation and progressed to dismemberment: http://jaapl.org/content/38/2/239.long However, I'm not aware of any cases where a serial killer as alternated between dismemberment and JtR style street killing. In fact, are there any examples of an offender who has alternated between dismemberment and any other kind of violent murder?

However, things are far more complicated than that. For instance, the Torso Perpetrator was very consistent in his ritualistic behaviour, and these rituals differed substantially from what we observe in the C5 murders.

Thus, the Torso perpetrator decapitated his victims, JtR didn't. This may have been ritualistic, or practical, I.e. to prevent identification. In any event, this "signature" is absent in all of the C5 cases, even though in Kelly's case at least, he presumably had more than enough time. This suggests to me that "JtR" lacked either the skill or the inclination to perform such an act.

The Torso victims were all stored: in the case of the Whitehall victim for up to 8 weeks, and Jackson for several days: she was last seen on the 31st May, but her remains were not discovered until 4th June. This ritual clearly meant something to the Torso perpetrator, considering the risk he must have been taking in not disposing of the remains straight away but clearly was not a consideration for JtR.

The Torso perpetrator scattered body parts all over London, like "pieces of a puzzle". JtR didn't, even though he had the perfect opportunity with Kelly, considering the number of body parts removed.

The Torso perpetrator either abducted his victims, and took them to his dismemberment site, or inveigled them. JtR didn't.

The Torso perpetrator dismembered all of his victims. JtR dismembered none of his, even though Kelly afforded him the perfect opportunity.

Geographical considerations. JtR operated within a remarkably small area, I.e. Whitechapel/Spitalfields. For instance, from Flower and Dean Street, all of the murder sites are within a range of 0.6 miles, with the exception of Mitre Square, which was 1.1 miles away. In contrast, Torso operated all over London: I have already referred to the fact that Jackson's remains were scattered over a wide area, and Rainham is 27 miles from Whitechapel.

What can we deduce from this? It is submitted that JtR lacked transport, or/and was psychologically unwilling to expand his range. It also suggests to me that JtR was a poor man-like the bulk of Whitechapel residents-who simply couldn't afford the extravagance of, say, a horse and cart, let alone stabling costs, feeding of animal, vet fees etc.

In contrast, Torso must have been a much better off perpetrator, someone with the income to afford transport, as well as a bolt-hole/dismemberment site.

[John G]

Differences between Jackson and Kelly.

Jackson was dismembered, Kelly wasn't.

Jackson was decapitated, Kelly wasn't.

Kelly was killed in situ, Jackson wasn't.

Jackson's body parts were scattered over a wide area. Kelly's weren't scattered at all.

Jackson's body parts were bundled up into parcels. Kelly's weren't.

Jackson had two long vertical strips of skin removed from the abdominal wall, which were then parcelled up with other body parts. Kelly didn't.

Kelly was killed in a frenzy, by a perpetrator exhibiting no skill whatsoever. Jackson wasn't: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...0monro&f=false

Jackson's heart was missing. In respect of Kelly this is a contentious point.

Jackson was pregnant,and the foetus was missing, suggesting this was a main focal point for Torso, which may partially explain the abdominal wall injuries: see, for example, Debra's Gray's Anatomy theory. Kelly wasn't..

[John G]

Were JtR murders as "theatrical as Torso's, as you suggest? In my ipioon, yes, but in a fundamentally different way.

[Fisherman]

In fact, are there any examples of an offender who has alternated between dismemberment and any other kind of violent murder?

Let's begin there: Ted Bundy occasionally dismembered. The Mad Butcher of Kingsbury Run did. Tsutomo Miyazaki did. There are quite probably more or even many more, but I don't want to spend any more time looking for them.

[Fisherman]

John G:

However, things are far more complicated than that. For instance, the Torso Perpetrator was very consistent in his ritualistic behaviour, and these rituals differed substantially from what we observe in the C5 murders.

So which are his rituals, John? Mind you, its good that you have finally dumped the idea that these were all practical dismemberments!

Thus, the Torso perpetrator decapitated his victims, JtR didn't. This may have been ritualistic, or practical, I.e. to prevent identification. In any event, this "signature" is absent in all of the C5 cases, even though in Kelly's case at least, he presumably had more than enough time. This suggests to me that "JtR" lacked either the skill or the inclination to perform such an act.

If the torso killer needed to dismember to dump, then that is the whole explanation, is it not? Why on earth would the Ripper decapitate, if it was not something he felt compelled to do for reasons of urge or ritual? But this has been said a thousand times! Why is it not enough?

The Torso victims were all stored: in the case of the Whitehall victim for up to 8 weeks, and Jackson for several days: she was last seen on the 31st May, but her remains were not discovered until 4th June. This ritual clearly meant something to the Torso perpetrator, considering the risk he must have been taking in not disposing of the remains straight away but clearly was not a consideration for JtR.

No, not all torso victims were stored. The 1873 victim was not. And you must realize that if the killer LIKED his bodies and/or body parts, then the Ripper COULD NOT store his victims, whereas the torso killer could. Very uncomplicated, therefore. A problem only arises if we conclude that there was an actual urge to stor bodies that could not be quenched, in which case the Ripper would have needed to carry his victims into some storage facility and leave them there. Does that sound likely to you? If he could store, he would store sometimes, but when he couldn't, he didn't. How about that?

The Torso perpetrator scattered body parts all over London, like "pieces of a puzzle". JtR didn't, even though he had the perfect opportunity with Kelly, considering the number of body parts removed.

You mean if he had brought a sack along to carry her in? To the Thames, presumably?
The torso murders involve some sort of transport means. No such means were employed in the Ripper murders. Again a problem only arises when we believe that the killer felt an unquenchable urge to transport bodies before dumping them. Did he?
How about floating the parts of the torso victims got press coverage and leaving a dead prostitute with her innards spread all around her ALSO reached that goal. Win-win, eh?

The Torso perpetrator either abducted his victims, and took them to his dismemberment site, or inveigled them. JtR didn't.

So we need to accept that a killer who can and will kill in a secluded location can also kill out in the streets. ehhh, let's see.... okey, accepted!
Is it to be expected, though? No, it is not. Then why think it happened? Because the similarities go a long way to prove it beyond reasonable doubt.

The Torso perpetrator dismembered all of his victims. JtR dismembered none of his, even though Kelly afforded him the perfect opportunity.

It is only if we think dismemberment was - again - an unquenchable need for the killer that this becomes of interest. Otherwise it remains that when you kill at home, you dismember, when you kill away from home, you don't have to.

Geographical considerations. JtR operated within a remarkably small area, I.e. Whitechapel/Spitalfields. For instance, from Flower and Dean Street, all of the murder sites are within a range of 0.6 miles, with the exception of Mitre Square, which was 1.1 miles away. In contrast, Torso operated all over London: I have already referred to the fact that Jackson's remains were scattered over a wide area, and Rainham is 27 miles from Whitechapel.

The victims can have been procured in the same small area nevertheless. And RAINHAM, John? Do you think the victim was slain in RAINHAM...? The part down there had of course floated there! Why bring up the distance to Rainham in this context? It is not a sound thing to do. We need to be reasonable, John!

What can we deduce from this? It is submitted that JtR lacked transport, or/and was psychologically unwilling to expand his range. It also suggests to me that JtR was a poor man-like the bulk of Whitechapel residents-who simply couldn't afford the extravagance of, say, a horse and cart, let alone stabling costs, feeding of animal, vet fees etc.

We cannot deduce that the Ripper lacked transport, no. He may have owned thirty carriages and an omnibus for all we know. All we can say is that he di9d not USE transport, but that is another thing altogether. The torso killer may not have used transport when picking up his victims, we only know that he did so when dumping the bodies. And as we - hopefully - have agreed by now: When you kill at home...

In contrast, Torso must have been a much better off perpetrator, someone with the income to afford transport, as well as a bolt-hole/dismemberment site.

No, he must not have been more affluent at all. The price of Wales has been suggested as the Ripper, and the reason that none of us believe in him as the perp is NOT that he was too rich.

[Fisherman]

Differences between Jackson and Kelly.

Jackson was dismembered, Kelly wasn't.

Jackson was decapitated, Kelly wasn't.

Kelly was killed in situ, Jackson wasn't.

Jackson's body parts were scattered over a wide area. Kelly's weren't scattered at all.

Jackson's body parts were bundled up into parcels. Kelly's weren't.

Jackson had two long vertical strips of skin removed from the abdominal wall, which were then parcelled up with other body parts. Kelly didn't.

Kelly was killed in a frenzy, by a perpetrator exhibiting no skill whatsoever. Jackson wasn't: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...0monro&f=false

Jackson's heart was missing. In respect of Kelly this is a contentious point.

Jackson was pregnant,and the foetus was missing, suggesting this was a main focal point for Torso, which may partially explain the abdominal wall injuries: see, for example, Debra's Gray's Anatomy theory. Kelly wasn't..

Similarities:

Uterus taken away. Very, very unusual.

Heart taken away. Very, very unusual.

Cut from sternum to groin. Very unusual.

Abdominal wall removed in flaps. Almost unheard of.

Cut by knife. Common.

Extreme overkill. Rare.

Prostitutes, both of them. Common.

Londoners, both of them.

Killed within a period of eight months.

Both young women.

This cannot be explained away, ´m afraid, and it takes precedence over the dissimilarities, hands down. Any police force who did not work from the notion of a single killer when damage like this is involved would be beyond irreparably stupid.

[Fisherman]

Were JtR murders as "theatrical as Torso's, as you suggest? In my ipioon, yes, but in a fundamentally different way.

It is a question of displaying the handiwork of a killer in both series. It is about producing murders that evoke maximum press interest and public outrage in both series, whether consciously or not. Most killers have no such interests at all, and so this is yet another striking similarity of many.

[Sam Flynn]

Jackson's heart was missing.

And both her lungs in their entirety, let's not forget.

Good posts, John.

[Abby Normal]

Unfortunately didn't think my last post was hostile! It certainly wasn't intended to be, although as we take diametrically opposed views there is bound to be a large degree of disagreement.

Firstly, an overview. Serial killers can sometimes elaborate or evolve their ritualistic behaviour. For instance, Schlesinger refers to an offender who began with post mortem mutilation and progressed to dismemberment: http://jaapl.org/content/38/2/239.long However, I'm not aware of any cases where a serial killer as alternated between dismemberment and JtR style street killing. In fact, are there any examples of an offender who has alternated between dismemberment and any other kind of violent murder?

However, things are far more complicated than that. For instance, the Torso Perpetrator was very consistent in his ritualistic behaviour, and these rituals differed substantially from what we observe in the C5 murders.

Thus, the Torso perpetrator decapitated his victims, JtR didn't. This may have been ritualistic, or practical, I.e. to prevent identification. In any event, this "signature" is absent in all of the C5 cases, even though in Kelly's case at least, he presumably had more than enough time. This suggests to me that "JtR" lacked either the skill or the inclination to perform such an act.

The Torso victims were all stored: in the case of the Whitehall victim for up to 8 weeks, and Jackson for several days: she was last seen on the 31st May, but her remains were not discovered until 4th June. This ritual clearly meant something to the Torso perpetrator, considering the risk he must have been taking in not disposing of the remains straight away but clearly was not a consideration for JtR.

The Torso perpetrator scattered body parts all over London, like "pieces of a puzzle". JtR didn't, even though he had the perfect opportunity with Kelly, considering the number of body parts removed.

The Torso perpetrator either abducted his victims, and took them to his dismemberment site, or inveigled them. JtR didn't.

The Torso perpetrator dismembered all of his victims. JtR dismembered none of his, even though Kelly afforded him the perfect opportunity.

Geographical considerations. JtR operated within a remarkably small area, I.e. Whitechapel/Spitalfields. For instance, from Flower and Dean Street, all of the murder sites are within a range of 0.6 miles, with the exception of Mitre Square, which was 1.1 miles away. In contrast, Torso operated all over London: I have already referred to the fact that Jackson's remains were scattered over a wide area, and Rainham is 27 miles from Whitechapel.

What can we deduce from this? It is submitted that JtR lacked transport, or/and was psychologically unwilling to expand his range. It also suggests to me that JtR was a poor man-like the bulk of Whitechapel residents-who simply couldn't afford the extravagance of, say, a horse and cart, let alone stabling costs, feeding of animal, vet fees etc.

In contrast, Torso must have been a much better off perpetrator, someone with the income to afford transport, as well as a bolt-hole/dismemberment site.

Hi John
this is a good post- I disagree with the basic premise, but good points nonetheless.

[Abby Normal]

Similarities:

Uterus taken away. Very, very unusual.

Heart taken away. Very, very unusual.

Cut from sternum to groin. Very unusual.

Abdominal wall removed in flaps. Almost unheard of.

Cut by knife. Common.

Extreme overkill. Rare.

Prostitutes, both of them. Common.

Londoners, both of them.

Killed within a period of eight months.

Both young women.

This cannot be explained away, ´m afraid, and it takes precedence over the dissimilarities, hands down. Any police force who did not work from the notion of a single killer when damage like this is involved would be beyond irreparably stupid.

aaaaaand this is why I favor they were the same man. there are differences of course, as highlighted by JohnGs good post-but the similarities are more, and more striking-more RARE similarities than differences IMHO.

[Sam Flynn]

Uterus taken away. Very, very unusual.

Heart taken away. Very, very unusual.

Cut from sternum to groin. Very unusual.

Abdominal wall removed in flaps. Almost unheard of.

You're ignoring the specifics and over-generalising.

Londoners, both of them.

Eh? Oh, you mean they lived in London. Yes, at opposite ends of the city, where they also died.

Killed within a period of eight months.

The torso murders ran for over a decade. What we have here is an overlap, not two co-terminous series of crimes.

Both young women.

As are many victims of prostitute killers. You (rightly) noted that prostitutes were often murder victims, so why not this dismiss this criterion for similar reasons?

Extreme overkill. Rare.

Jackson was extreme overkill? No - Kelly was extreme overkill; Jackson got off lightly.

[Abby Normal]

You're ignoring the specifics and over-generalising.
Eh? Oh, you mean they lived in London. Yes, at opposite ends of the city, where they also died.
The torso murders ran for over a decade. What we have here is an overlap, not two co-terminous series of crimes.
As are many victims of prostitute killers. You (rightly) noted that prostitutes were often murder victims, so why not this dismiss this criterion for similar reasons?
Jackson was extreme overkill? No - Kelly was extreme overkill; Jackson got off lightly.

Hi Sam

You're ignoring the specifics and over-generalising.

i dont know removing the heart, cutting away abdomin in sections etc. seem pretty darn specific to me.

Eh? Oh, you mean they lived in London. Yes, at opposite ends of the city, where they also died.

Jackson was last heard of sleeping rough on the embankment, but we don't know exactly where she lived-any way hardly at opposite ends of the city, either way though its moot because we don't know where torsoman picked her up-may well have been WC for all we know.

but triple set moot point any way because yes same city-not like one was in London and the other was in Liverpool.

The torso murders ran for over a decade. What we have here is an overlap, not two co-terminous series of crimes.

did you mean to say contemperous? because actually they were both "co-terminous"-both series ended at the same time-which is a much bigger coincidence then any overlap of the series.

actually I think this point gets overlooked alot by the seperate series crowd. ive never seen a good explanation for it, or even an attempt for that matter.

As are many victims of prostitute killers. You (rightly) noted that prostitutes were often murder victims, so why not this dismiss this criterion for similar reasons?

simply because its same victimology. theres a boatload of different victimology. both here targeted youngish female prostitutes.

if torsoman targeted a different victim type, it would be game over, for me anyway.

Jackson was extreme overkill? No - Kelly was extreme overkill; Jackson got off lightly.

you've got to be kidding with this one, sam

[Sam Flynn]

you've got to be kidding with this one, sam

Jackson was cut into a few large chunks. Kelly was almost completely shredded, hacked out of all proportion or recognition.

[Fisherman]

Sam Flynn: You're ignoring the specifics and over-generalising.

What you call "specifics" are nothing but guesswork on your behalf. No two cases will be exactly alike - but when there are REAL specifics like uterus removal, heart removal and the removal of abdominal walls involved, it is not our task to try our hardest to find possible reasons to dismiss them. The only realistic approach is to accept how we are almost certainly dealing with a common killer and then to produce any evidence that speaks for another solution. And musing about how pregnancy MAY - COULD - POSSIBLY - PERHAPS played a role is no such evidence.

Eh? Oh, you mean they lived in London. Yes, at opposite ends of the city, where they also died.

Since you now claim to know this, you are welcome to produce the addresses. Alternatively, you can own up to having jumped the gun.

The torso murders ran for over a decade. What we have here is an overlap, not two co-terminous series of crimes.

Dahmer spent nine years inbetween his first and his second murder. Others have done the same, roughly. But I am pleased to hear that you accept that the 1873 and 1874 murders are part of the torso series.

As are many victims of prostitute killers. You (rightly) noted that prostitutes were often murder victims, so why not this dismiss this criterion for similar reasons?

I listed similarities. It is a similarity. What else do you want me to strike off the list, Gareth? The flaps?

Jackson was extreme overkill? No - Kelly was extreme overkill; Jackson got off lightly

I stand corrected. Of course being cut up in little pieces and having a set of inner organs extracted from your body is no overkill, it is "getting off lightly". Ehrm!

[Fisherman]

Jackson was cut into a few large chunks. Kelly was almost completely shredded, hacked out of all proportion or recognition.

Both cases are extreme examples of overkill nevertheless. I could say that Kelly got off lightly since she was not cut up in pieces - but I would not say something that dumb. Both women were victims of grotesque overkill, end of.