Internal organ removing SK

[Fisherman]

Here is a thread where a few examples are posted about serialists who have taken out organs and - in some cases - taken them along with themselves as they left the murder scenes.

It is very apparent that such examples are very hard to find. These are rare, rare creatures.

But when we have two such series of murders committed in the same town, at the same time, and with even more rare details in common, it has nevertheless been concluded that we are dealing not with one, but two killers.

And why?

Because we know that the victims in one of the series were dismembered.

We ALSO know that these dismemberment victims were killed in some sort of bolthole, so that the necessity to secretely remove the bodies from that bolthole would inevitably arise.

And we also know that this necessity was never on the cards in the other series, because those victims were not killed in locations that could be tied to the killer.

One has to wonder whatever happened to logic.

[Kattrup]

But when we have two such series of murders committed in the same town, at the same time, and with even more rare details in common, it has nevertheless been concluded that we are dealing not with one, but two killers.

And why?

Because we know that the victims in one of the series were dismembered.

I don't think that is correct; it is not commonly accepted that both series were by the same hand because

a) authorities at the time did not believe so, i. e. the investigators at the time, who knew infinitely more about these cases than we do, did not consider them linked

b) it has not been established that all the torso/dismemberment cases were murders or that the the same person or persons were involved in them, i. e. the series you postulate is not factually a series at all.

I don't deny that the descriptions of the cases certainly are intriguing, as Debra Arif and you have pointed out, but one has to wonder how many ways there are to dismember a body, and simultaneously how many ways there are for a medical man to describe such a dismemberment.

My point being, of course, that the similarities you find so decisive might be a result of similarly-trained medicos using the same vocabulary to describe cuts imposed by human anatomy.

One has to wonder whatever happened to logic.

I don't think anything happened to it, but it's frequently misapplied or mistaken for statistical likelihood or (worse!) historical reasoning

[RockySullivan]

I don't think that is correct; it is not commonly accepted that both series were by the same hand because

a) authorities at the time did not believe so, i. e. the investigators at the time, who knew infinitely more about these cases than we do, did not consider them linked

I don't think that is correct, there are plenty of press reports about LE investigating the torsos as connected to the ripper

[Kattrup]

I don't think that is correct, there are plenty of press reports about LE investigating the torsos as connected to the ripper

I agree, there are plenty of newspaper articles speculating about a link.

i' m sadly unable to decipher who LE is?

[Fisherman]

Kattrup: I don't think that is correct; it is not commonly accepted that both series were by the same hand because

a) authorities at the time did not believe so, i. e. the investigators at the time, who knew infinitely more about these cases than we do, did not consider them linked

There is no listed factual matter that disallows for a shared identity. If there had been such a matter, I think it would have been known to us.
However, much as the contemporary police potentially knew "infinitely more" about the cases than we do, we know infinitely more than THEY did when it comes to the underlying pathologies of serialists and dismemberment killers. So we are evenly matched in that respect, and any misgivings about a shared identity that have no underlying factual base are not very viable reasons for disallowing for it.

b) it has not been established that all the torso/dismemberment cases were murders or that the the same person or persons were involved in them, i. e. the series you postulate is not factually a series at all.

Nor is the Ripper murders. Nor is any series where the killer was not caught. In some cases, killers have been caught but have not confessed to all the cases ascribed to them. In such a case, the cases not admitted to cannot conclusively be counted into the series.
But that´s not something that should disallow us to make comparisons inbetween single murder cases- in fact, the best possibility we have to make a correct categorization of them, is to make those comparisons. And it is basically easy: If there are similar damage done to two bodies, but of a common type (a stab to the trunk, strangulation, a blow to the head), then much as we should allow for a common killer, the type of damage is not enough to be certain at all. If there are similar damage done to two bodies that is of an uncommon type (the eyes gouged out, the uterus taken away, the abdomen cut from ribs to pelvis, the abdominal wall taken away in sections), then we have much more reason to make the call of a single killer. The more these details are, and the more uncommon they are, the more certain the identification. And in these two series, there are so many commonalities of such uncommon tye, that I fail to see that there is any comparison to be found throughout history. That tells it´s own story, and puts the identification of a single killer very, very close to being beyond reasonable doubt to my mind.

I don't deny that the descriptions of the cases certainly are intriguing, as Debra Arif and you have pointed out, but one has to wonder how many ways there are to dismember a body, and simultaneously how many ways there are for a medical man to describe such a dismemberment.

Don´t wonder, Kattrup: find out! How common are serialist cases involving the taking away of the abdominal wall in sections? How common are evisceration cases where both sexual and non-sexual organs are taken out? How common is it that evisceration or dismemberment cases are identified by medicos as having been the work of a surgically experienced killer? How often do eviscerators/dismemberment killers take rings from their victims? How common is it that a section of the colon is cut out from serial killer´s victims?

If you were to find two examples (but believe me, you won´t) of all these things, anywhere in the world, anywhere in time, it would be amazing.
As it stands, the only two cases we have are two series of prostitution murders in the late victorian London, performed alongside each other.

My point being, of course, that the similarities you find so decisive might be a result of similarly-trained medicos using the same vocabulary to describe cuts imposed by human anatomy.

But it does not matter what shape the abdominal flaps had, or the number of them etcetera; they were nevertheless flaps taken away from the abdominal wall, laying the abdominal cavity open.
It does not matter how long sections of the colon were taken away, they represented taken away colons nevertheless.
It does not matter how many rings were taken and what they looked like - they were rings taken from the victims nevertheless.
It does not matter which organs were taken - it remains that both sexually oriented and non-sexually oriented organs were taken away from victims in both series.
It does not matter if the cuts between ribs and pubes veered to the left or the right - the overall importance lies in how they were cuts from ribs to pubes nevertheless.

It´s not about in how many ways you can take away abdominal walls in flaps - it is about the fact that killers taking away the abdominal wall in flaps - NO MATTER HOW MANY AND HOW THEY WERE SHAPED - is more or less unheard of.

The similarities are too obvious and too many not to make the call of a shared identity. Maybe a lawyer could make something of the defense, but really - even if a shrewd lawyer was able to show that Jacksons abdominal flaps were of a different shape and taken away with another blade than the flaps of Chapman and Kelly, it still remains that the abdominal wall was taken away in flaps. It is much, much likelier that the killer used different blades and cut slightly differently, than it is that we are dealing with two killers in the same town at the same time, who cut away abdominal walls in flaps! If a killer has settled on the idea to remove the abdominal wall in flaps, then he will do so with whatever implement he has access too - he will not stop on account of not having brought his favourite knife with him.

I don't think anything happened to it, but it's frequently misapplied or mistaken for statistical likelihood or (worse!) historical reasoning

There is no other way to lay the puzzle, Kattrup. It was always down to the inherent similarities inbetween the cases.

[Sam Flynn]

This documentary is instructive, and is well worth watching:

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2vuzt5_killers-behind-bars-s02e03-robert-napper_tv

A series of murders, with almost exactly the same MO, signature and victimology, in the same geographical area during precisely the same time-frame. The presenter (criminology professor David Wilson) analyses the details and makes a compelling case that the same hand might have been responsible for all these murders.

*** SPOILER ALERT ***

However, it transpired to be two separate killers, which wasn't known at the time the documentary was made. Still, I can understand why Prof Wilson reasoned in the way that he did, because the murders were indeed quite similar. Much, much more similarities than betwen the Ripper and Torso murders, in point of fact. Indeed, there are arguably more significant differences within the Ripper and Torso crimes, never mind between them, than exist between the cases covered in this documentary.

[Fisherman]

Sam Flynn:
A series of murders, with almost exactly the same MO, signature and victimology, in the same geographical area during precisely the same time-frame.

the murders were indeed quite similar. Much, much more similarities than betwen the Ripper and Torso murders, in point of fact.

List the similarities, please. Which murder by Stagg are you comparing to the Nickel murder? While you do, I advice people to read this passage from UK Essays:
The case of Colin Stagg was seen as a textbook example of the unethical use of profiling and the abuse of powers (Turvey 2008 and Ormerod 1999), because the investigation was concentrated on finding the suspect and then constructing the investigation instead of investigating the crime scene and conducting investigation. In the other words, that's an example of a case construction to charge the suspect (Maguire and Norris 1992).

However, the entire and sophisticated psychological trap was created by Britton. Stagg was manipulated, entrapped, enticed and promised an affair with a beautiful woman only if he would confess. Simply speaking, the aim of the operation was to trick Stagg into confession. Britton's way of constructing the covert operation, hints during the interview and analysing his reactions were unethical (Cohen 1999, Evans 1992 and Morris 2002).

[RockySullivan]

I agree, there are plenty of newspaper articles speculating about a link.

i' m sadly unable to decipher who LE is?

Law Enforcement

[Fisherman]

This documentary is instructive, and is well worth watching:

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2vuzt5_killers-behind-bars-s02e03-robert-napper_tv

A series of murders, with almost exactly the same MO, signature and victimology, in the same geographical area during precisely the same time-frame. The presenter (criminology professor David Wilson) analyses the details and makes a compelling case that the same hand might have been responsible for all these murders.

*** SPOILER ALERT ***

However, it transpired to be two separate killers, which wasn't known at the time the documentary was made. Still, I can understand why Prof Wilson reasoned in the way that he did, because the murders were indeed quite similar. Much, much more similarities than betwen the Ripper and Torso murders, in point of fact. Indeed, there are arguably more significant differences within the Ripper and Torso crimes, never mind between them, than exist between the cases covered in this documentary.

Right, Gareth, now I have seen the docu, and I have evaluated your statement that there were "much, much more similarities" between the two Napper murders and the Tiltman murder, than between the torso murders and the ripper murders.

I earlier listed eleven similarities between the ripper and the torso murders, and I now invite you to produce " much, much more" similarities for these cases.

I would also like to point out that the cases you cite are multiple stabbing cases, a much more common crime than evisceration murders. And stabbing is of course extremely common wheras cutting abdomens open is the exact opposite.

Moreover, it is my understanding that Nappers killings were the results of stalking victims actively, wherreas the Tiltman murder was a spur-of-the-moment attack.

It applies that the Napper murders had rape as an ingredient, whereas the Tiltman murder had not.

The Napper murders were both attacks against a woman with a child (one was raped and killed), whereas the Tiltman murder was not.

There was not a single element in any of these murders, not the Napper ones and not the Tiltman one, that was rare per se.

Am I correct in saying that the only likeness inbetween the attacks is that they were all three knife attacks, Gareth? Of course, they supposedly involved gross overkill, but whereas Nappers victims suffered half a hundred stabs, it seems Tiltman may have suffered as few as nine stabs - that is what the later reports say, whereas it was initially stated that there were 40 stabs. Since we know that Tiltman staggered a hundred yards before collapsing, I think 40 stabs sounds a lot.
So maybe there were large differences in this respect too?

So what remains, Gareth? Please tell me! How are these cases "much, much more similar" than the Ripper cases and the torso cases?

[Fisherman]

Of course, the docu firmly establishes how the police will look for similar traits inbetween murders when looking for serial killers.

A flurry of many stabs to the upper body is quite enough for them to feel a need to investigate further whether cases are linked.

One wonders how they would look upon the round dozen similarities between the ripper and torso cases?

[Fisherman]

one has to wonder how many ways there are to dismember a body

Since you ask, mainly two. And one is quite rare.

[John G]

I don't think that is correct; it is not commonly accepted that both series were by the same hand because

a) authorities at the time did not believe so, i. e. the investigators at the time, who knew infinitely more about these cases than we do, did not consider them linked

b) it has not been established that all the torso/dismemberment cases were murders or that the the same person or persons were involved in them, i. e. the series you postulate is not factually a series at all.

I don't deny that the descriptions of the cases certainly are intriguing, as Debra Arif and you have pointed out, but one has to wonder how many ways there are to dismember a body, and simultaneously how many ways there are for a medical man to describe such a dismemberment.

My point being, of course, that the similarities you find so decisive might be a result of similarly-trained medicos using the same vocabulary to describe cuts imposed by human anatomy.


I don't think anything happened to it, but it's frequently misapplied or mistaken for statistical likelihood or (worse!) historical reasoning

Excellent points which I completely agree with.

[Michael W Richards]

After more than 10 years here I would have hoped that the arguments for a Ripper would get better...more reasoned and supported by some kind of evidence other than contemporary and modern opinions, but it seems apparent having ones head up his own arse is preferable to changing an opinion for many.

Not only is there ZERO EVIDENCE that just one man killed Five women in the Fall of 1888, its illogical to just assume that all violent offenders were off the street during that same interval in time. Its illogical to assume murders were linked because the women got their throats cut, its illogical to imagine that skilled knifesmen just lose their abilities withing a few weeks, and its downright mutton headed to pretend that not just anyone, thats right anyone, can cut people up. You serial killer proponents here should take some of the data that shows how people sometimes cut into, and cut up, victims. They are not all monsters like you imagine this fictional Jack to be either. A teenage boy in a neighborhood I lived in until recently strangled a girl he had love/hate issues with, then cut her into parts. Was he driven to cut the victim...or did he decide to do that after she was dead? Of course its the second scenario.....just like anyone of these women, (after the first 2 canonical who were CLEARLY killed by the same person...same victimology, MO, signatures, technique, skill sets) could have been cut up by someone who decided to do so after the fact. For whatever reason. Added insult to the body, to hide parts in different places, to make it easier to transport these pieces in even broad daylight, to make it appear that this same fictional barbarian you imagine did the murder instead of the real killer(s)....

Ripperology has book promoters, theory pushers, uninformed students and people who disagree with everything anyone else comes up with....but there are very few real thinkers among them.

When you have nothing...you have nothing. Period. Fisherman, unless you have some proof of your ideas then you have nothing....just like Trevor has nothing with his conflicting findings by modern medical professionals. Having nothing isnt a bad thing, pretending its more than that can be.

As in the case of Ripperology. There is nothing in any evidence anywhere now known to man that connects Canonical Victim 1 to victim 2, or 1 to 3, or 4, or 5....there are just varied degrees of egotists who claim there is.

How about starting a new year honestly ...the Canonical Model has not and can not be proven with what evidence is known today. So look elsewhere.

Unless its just another Ripper book you want to sell, rather than the truth you want to find.

[Fisherman]

After more than 10 years here I would have hoped that the arguments for a Ripper would get better...more reasoned and supported by some kind of evidence other than contemporary and modern opinions, but it seems apparent having ones head up his own arse is preferable to changing an opinion for many.

Not only is there ZERO EVIDENCE that just one man killed Five women in the Fall of 1888, its illogical to just assume that all violent offenders were off the street during that same interval in time. Its illogical to assume murders were linked because the women got their throats cut, its illogical to imagine that skilled knifesmen just lose their abilities withing a few weeks, and its downright mutton headed to pretend that not just anyone, thats right anyone, can cut people up. You serial killer proponents here should take some of the data that shows how people sometimes cut into, and cut up, victims. They are not all monsters like you imagine this fictional Jack to be either. A teenage boy in a neighborhood I lived in until recently strangled a girl he had love/hate issues with, then cut her into parts. Was he driven to cut the victim...or did he decide to do that after she was dead? Of course its the second scenario.....just like anyone of these women, (after the first 2 canonical who were CLEARLY killed by the same person...same victimology, MO, signatures, technique, skill sets) could have been cut up by someone who decided to do so after the fact. For whatever reason. Added insult to the body, to hide parts in different places, to make it easier to transport these pieces in even broad daylight, to make it appear that this same fictional barbarian you imagine did the murder instead of the real killer(s)....

Ripperology has book promoters, theory pushers, uninformed students and people who disagree with everything anyone else comes up with....but there are very few real thinkers among them.

When you have nothing...you have nothing. Period. Fisherman, unless you have some proof of your ideas then you have nothing....just like Trevor has nothing with his conflicting findings by modern medical professionals. Having nothing isnt a bad thing, pretending its more than that can be.

As in the case of Ripperology. There is nothing in any evidence anywhere now known to man that connects Canonical Victim 1 to victim 2, or 1 to 3, or 4, or 5....there are just varied degrees of egotists who claim there is.

How about starting a new year honestly ...the Canonical Model has not and can not be proven with what evidence is known today. So look elsewhere.

Unless its just another Ripper book you want to sell, rather than the truth you want to find.

Happy New Year to you too, from your dishonest, muttonheaded friend!

[Kattrup]

One wonders how they would look upon the round dozen similarities between the ripper and torso cases?

One does not have to wonder since we know what they thought, namely that the torsos were not the work of the Ripper.