|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Eric Smith, Cadet
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 07, 2003 - 3:33 am: | 
|
I was just reading the Pinchin St. murder and it has a report by Mcnaghten that female bodies were found with no head or legs in 1887 (Rainham), Oct 3, 1888 (Whitehall), Jun 4, 1889 (Thames) and Sept 11, 1889 (Pinchin St). Does anyone think these may all be a second serial killer operating in London. Why hasn't there been more uproar about these? They are just as gruesome as the Ripper murders. |
Andrew Spallek
Sergeant
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 25
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 19, 2003 - 3:56 pm: |
|
Michael Gordon has written a fine book: The Thames Torso Murders of Victorian London. This book is full of information about the crimes, but I tended to get lost and was often unsure of the author's main point.
I would be open to the suggestion that the torso murderer and JTR were one and the same in spite of the different MO were it not for the concurence of one torso murder with the Whitechapel killings. I can allow for a change in MO over time, but not two so very different MOs in the same time period. Still, the Pinchin Street torso had an abdominal gash not so very different from the Whitechapel victims. This torso was preserved as buried in a lead cylinder and could possibly still be in good condition today.
Andy
|
Christopher T George
Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 194
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 19, 2003 - 6:32 pm: |
|
Hi, Andy:
As I have mentioned elsewhere, I reviewed Gordon's The Thames Torso Murders in the latest (April-July 2003) issue of Ripper Notes. In the review, I remarked that one big difference between the Ripper murders and the torso murders is that in the torso series, an evident attempt was made to both hide the crimes and to hide the identity of the victims, unlike in the Ripper crimes. In the torso murders, pieces of bodies were distributed widely and the head could not be found, which made identification of the victim hard if not impossible. The Ripper, by contrast, apparently made no attempt to hide his crimes, to hide the bodies, or to make identification of his victims hard. It might be noted also that although R. Michael Gordon's chosen suspect for both the Ripper murders and the torso crimes is Severin Klosowski (George Chapman), in the poisoning murders for which Chapman was hung, there was also no attempt to hide the identification of the victims or, apart from the obvious subterfuge of discretely poisoning his common-law wives, of hiding the crimes. Given the situation in which Chapman's three lady friends died in mysterious circumstances, one after the other, natural suspicion and consequently the law was bound to catch up with him sooner or later.
Best regards
Chris George |
Andrew Spallek
Sergeant
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 27
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 19, 2003 - 11:17 pm: |
|
Chris,
Thanks for your review. I enjoyed reading the book but was puzzeld at times in that Gordon seemed to be admitting how unlikely it was for the same murderer to be following such different MOs at the same time and yet he was also arguing that the same man was responsible for both sets of murders. Very confusing to me. (I borrowed the book from the library so I had to read it rather hastily and I didn't not have time to go back over it).
Andy
|
Christopher T George
Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 195
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 20, 2003 - 8:16 am: |
|
Hi, Andy:
I have remarked before that at least we know that Klosowski (Chapman) was a card carrying murderer and lived in the area, so that puts him on a different level to supposed suspects such as Walter Sickert, James Maybrick, or Lewis Carroll, who as far as we know never murdered anyone, even if two of those men, Sickert and Maybrick, had some type of connection to the East End, although they can't be proved to have been in the area at the time of the murders. So, in other words, I do think Chapman deserves scrutiny even if the MO appears different to the type of crime for which he was executed.
All the best
Chris |
JeffHamm
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, June 19, 2003 - 10:42 pm: |
|
Hi Eric,
The torso murders could reflect a second serial killer, but such dismemberment is sometimes performed in order to fit a body into a box or a bag in order to secretly transport the evidence from the murder scene to a dump site.
For example, there are the various "trunk" murders, so named because the victims were dismembered in order to fit them into a shipping trunk. The trunk was then put on a train, or some other form of shipping. The "parcel" was never claimed at the other end, and presumably some attempt is made at disguising who sent the trunk originally. There's a few of these, I think one or two in the UK, and one or two in the US? It's been a while since I've read about them but they weren't related despite the similarities. At least one was solved.
Anyway, none of this is to say that the torso murders aren't the work of the same person, only that in these cases the dismemberment could have been a "practical" aspect required to ease the disposal of the body which may have been thought of by different people independently. Getting a consensus on one of these two possibilities today would probably be more difficult than getting a consensus just which victims were Jack's.
- Jeff |
Eric Smith
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 25, 2003 - 5:52 am: |
|
Hi Jeff,
Was there any sort of organized crime in London during the 1880s that might provide a clue as to who might have carried out these "practical" mutilations? |
Christopher T George
Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 203
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 26, 2003 - 11:03 am: |
|
Hi, Eric:
Indeed there were such gangs operating in the East End. Examples of such gangs were the High-Rip and Nichols (or Nichol) gangs. Such organizations were protection racketeers who demanded a percentage of prostitutes' earnings. The press speculated whether the murders could have been committed by such a gang. See Leytonstone Express and Independent, 8 September 1888. The Nichols gang was also portrayed in the recent Johnny Depp film "From Hell" as having a part in what was happening in the East End, at least as intimidators if not actual killers. See the Casebook dissertation on "From Hell: Fact or Fiction?" As noted there, the name "Ripper" actually might derive from the term "High Rip" although that is just speculation.
All the best
Chris George |
Martin D. Maola
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, June 28, 2003 - 4:40 pm: |
|
Re: London Torso Killings
Quite apart from dismemberment being used to make the bodies easier to transport (and this may indeed have been a partial reason for the butchery) in the "Ripper" killings, the bodies, though disemboweled, were intact -- that is, all identifying elements (hands, head, arms, etc)-- were present. In the Torso killings, the one component which was never found (as far as I know) were the victim's heads. Now, given that 1887-89 was long before fingerprinting was a formal identifying tool, the head (or rather the face or bodily marks of the victim) became essential.
It seems to me (and contemporaries with the Ripper seem to agree on this) that the Ripper WANTED his victims identified and was flaunting them, whereas the torso killer took great pains to hide the victim's identities. This would tend at first glance to suggest two distinct killers, with dissimilar MO's. However, as was observed in some of the Ripper killings, the heads were nearly severed by the killer, being cut back into the spine. So were the MO's dissimilar? And were there two killers, or simply one? One killer using the Ripper killings to divert attention from the torso murders? And if one killer, were the Ripper killings simply random while the torso murders were targetted? That all means of identification in the torso slayings were removed from the scenes, I would contend that these victims were targetted whereas the Ripper victims (conspiracy theories notwithstanding) most likely were not.
If correct, this would mean that the torso killings could potentially take on more significance than the Ripper killings. Who were the victims, why were they killed, and why were their identities in death obscured? Could their identities lead directly to that of the killer, where the Ripper killings could not?
Any ideas or comments? |
Jeff Hamm
Sergeant
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 24
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 29, 2003 - 9:48 pm: |
|
Hi Martin,
I don't think we can be sure the Ripper "wanted" his victims identified, but rather he may simply not have cared one way or the other if they were.
With the torso victims, I think you're spot on in terms of wanting to obscure the identity of the victims. This could suggest there's a link between victim and killer, where they are known to associate somehow. I don't think that link (and I'm speculating here), would be as strong as say husband and wife because the absense of the wife in the killers life would be so noticable. Someone might just get suspicious enough to suggest the husband when the body shows indicating a murder occured at the same time as the wife dissappeared.
It seems the tendency is to either hide the body in some location where the killer believes it will never get found or to try and stage the event to look like a stranger broke in and committed the murder. When the body is hidden in the floorboards or the walls, this strange behaviour is probably due partly to the need to know the body hasn't been found. I.e., If it's in the wall, I know the police haven't come across it yet, so I'm safe.
Anyway, the other thing that points away from husband/wife relationship is the fact that there's a few torso victims. If there's only one torso killer, then he's either "marrying" and killing off multiple wives (as per Chapman; but again this tends to lead to a suspect, if not actually a conviction, because of the multiple dissappearances of women in his life), or the relationship is a differnet one. There may be only one torso murderer, and he may have some sort of link with the victims (who may not be linked to each other though) that is strong enough that the victims ID might lead to him. The link, however, is probably some sort of aquaintance, rather than a friendship/lover/spouse type.
This is all guess work of course and I really have no idea what the "link" might be, but then, we don't know who the victims were, so we don't know what sort of lives they led. That sort of information would hopefully suggest some possible kinds of links though.
Anyway, I think the notion of the Ripper murders used as a distraction to the torso murders is a bit too compicated. It would make more sense, for example, to commit some random torso murders, and possibly ensure one of them was identified. This would seem a more obvious way to ensure the investigation for the important torso victims didn't point to the killer (i.e., there's no relationship between the killer and the one identified torso victim). Someone with as much planning as the "Ripper murders to distract from torso murders" theory suggests, is someone who would probably come up with such a plan.
Mind you, the torso murders are less well researched and we don't want to close any doors too soon. First thing to do would be to see what's been done already in terms of research into the torso murders. This would provide an initial data set that might suggest some possible avenues of further research.
- Jeff
|
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 54
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 7:34 pm: |
|
Because this topic is still current I thought I might poste a previous response by Stewart Evans in reply to a listmembers questions.
The original poste will be on the CD of the previous message boards.
----------------------------------
By Stewart P Evans on Thursday, November 26, 1998 - 06:27 pm:
Yaz,
The series of Thames torso murders began in May 1887, when a canvas bundle was found floating in the water by the ferry at Rainham in Essex. It was found to contain the trunk of a woman aged 28/29 years. The head, arms, and legs were missing, and appeared to have been removed by someone with anatomical knowledge. On June 8th another canvas parcel containing human limbs was recovered from the Thames near Temple Stairs. Dr. Calloway examined them and it was believed they came from the torso previously found. It was reported in the 'Penny Illustrated Paper' of June 11, 1887. A Mrs Cross had reported her 28 year old daughter missing since May 20th, and she was in the habit of going down to Richmond ferry. The girl had been accosted by the river in the direction of Staines shortly before her disappearance by a sinister looking man, who had stated he would kill her if she didn't give him her purse. She did so and he had left.
In July 1887 some more remains were found in Regent's Canal, Chalk farm. They also appeared to be from the same girl, and a complete body except for the head, and upper part of the chest had been recovered. Dr. Thomas Bond was called in by the Home Office and was of the opinion the body had been dissected by someone with anatomical knowledge.
On September 11, 1888, a female left arm was found in the Thames at Pimlico, and about two weeks later another arm was found in the grounds of the Blind Asylum at Lambeth. This was followed on October 2, 1888, by the discovery of the female torso in the cellars of the building construction site of the New Scotland Yard building on the banks of the Thames, this became known as 'The Whitehall Mystery.' Dr. Thomas Bond, and Dr. Hebbert examined the remains.
On June 4, 1889, a part of a body wrapped in what appeared to be an apron was found in the Thames near St. George's Stair, Horselydown. Soon after this a human leg and thigh was found, tied in what appeared to be part of a ladies ulster under the Albert Bridge. On the afternoon of June 6, 1889, another part of a body was found wrapped in linen in Battersea Park. Similar discoveries were made on the Chelsea Embankment, off Copington Wharf, Bankside, Southwark, the West India Dock and other places. As with the previous cases no head was found. Drs. Bond, Kempster and Hebbert examined the remains and declared them all to come from the same body, that of a woman aged between 24 and 26 years. Some skill, possibly that of a butcher, was shown in the dissection. Dr. Bond said that she was pregnant at the time of death. An old lady attended the mortuary and declared the remains to be those of her daughter Elizabeth Jackson, 24 years. A verdict of murder by person or persons unknown was returned after a long inquiry.
The final torso murder was the Pinchin Street case of September, 10, 1889, which was investigated as part of the Whitechapel series. A gash on the abdomen led to some speculation that it may be another 'Ripper' crime but this was totally without foundation. Again it resulted in the cerdict wilful murder against person or persons unknown. Although connected by the press as a series there was no positive connection established.
I hope that answers your quick questions Yaz. :-)
Stewart
-----------------------------
I always thought it an excellent summary by Stewart.
Regards, Jon
|
Chris Scott
Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 335
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 12:21 pm: |
|
On this subject I thought this report might be of interest - it is from the Olean Democrat, a New York paper, of 12 September 1889.
 |
Christopher T George
Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 263
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 04, 2003 - 11:04 am: |
|
Hi, Chris:
Thanks for posting this newspaper article. The article would appear to be about the Pinchin Street torso case which was the only one of the torso series included, at least by the press, as a "Whitechapel murder." The reported skepticism of the doctors as to the common identity of the murder is notable and possibly on the mark... though as you probably know author R. Michael Gordon feels his suspect George Chapman (Severin Klosowski) was responsible for both series of crimes, those usually ascribed to the Ripper as well as the torso crimes!
All the best
Chris |
Maryanne
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 07, 2003 - 6:39 pm: |
|
Gruesome! And our Jack certainly did want to decapitate victims! Perhaps he was just practising with the others! Busy chappie!
I've always wondered whether he could've killed more than just five. |
M.Mc.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, January 31, 2004 - 2:10 pm: |
|
I believe Jack the Ripper whoever he was killed more women than anyone will ever know. If you check the records of hookers and other women killed from 1880 to the 1900's. You see the peak is in the news in 1888 on into the 1890's of "unsolved" deaths on females. It's not easy to dig up this info but it can be found. Killers such as Jack the Ripper and others who followed him keep on killing until they are caught or get too old to do it anymore. So I suspect most if not all of the other crimes such as this one was the work of Jack the Ripper. If not then there had to be a copy-cat killer which I doubt. |
M Brown
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 30, 2004 - 7:49 am: |
|
It was stated earlier that the "torso murderer" took great pains to hide the identity of the victims, yet JTR didn`t mind whether the victim was identified.
How does this tie in with Mary Kelly when her face was so obliterated that I find it impossible that anyone could have given a true identification.
It was stated in the inquest that she had let another prostitute stay with her. Could she have been the victim.
Mary Kelly stayed around the area (as seen by 2 witnesses), until she heard that the body had been identified as her and then she left the area to continue her life.
The alternative is that the "torso murderer" copied JTR. Which explains the change in MO. re: inside not outside, shutting / locking the door (I guess JTR would have left the door wide open so anyone could have entered)and of course the destroying of the face. |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1509
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 12:32 pm: |
|
Hi,
One thing thats always puzzled me is why we arent all interested in the torso murders not jack. Ok I have insulted us all but that's not what i meant! i meant i wonder why they are relativley obscure and Jack has a place in history.
I mean they pre date the ripper murders. they are far more gory. Same sexual undertones, right? No killer ever identified.
Is it just the lack of name.
what if he had been labeled harry the hacker would that have been the difference?
Jenni
ps or have i been overthinking!
"I wanna really really really wanna zigazig ah"
|
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 386
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 2:11 pm: |
|
Jenni,
Good question and I can only hazard a couple reasons. For one, I think you are right about the branding aspect of the name "Jack the Ripper." Whoever coined it was a marketing genius and it rapidly resonated worldwide.
Second, my sense is that while "Harry the Hacker" (or maybe "Burt the Butcher") was certainly every bit the fiend as Jack the dismembering was done in solitary seclusion. Our Jack, however, was moving right within the community and always just a few seconds ahead of discovery. That element lends an extra dash of excitement to his crimes. Then too, Jack's victims were quickly identified and that must have provided another element of fear and immediacy to his crimes within the community.
Don. |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 695
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 2:31 pm: |
|
Jenni,
There was a book, I believe on the Torso murders by a "JtR author." But I can't remember author or title.
Andy S. |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 224
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 2:34 pm: |
|
Hi, Jen--
I think Don's hit it on the head--one of the greatest trade names in history plus the elusiveness.
Whoever wrote those letters to the newspapers certainly started something.The idea that Jack was the first serial killer is pretty rife among the general population and I'm sure that all of the above are the reason why--right name, right time, great PR guy.
Mags
|
Frank van Oploo
Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 399
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 4:35 pm: |
|
Hi Don et all,
Good post, Don. I was about to write something along similar lines.
Jack the Ripper butchered the poor women right under everybody’s noses, without anybody seeing or hearing a thing, leaving his victims for all to see (not that I think he thrived on this, though – I think he had or saw no other choice). He was among the East End’s inhabitants, he came out in the night, seemed to appear out of nowhere and disappear into thin air again and again. I think this is what made his case far more ‘attractive’ than the torso murders.
The torso murders were spread over a much longer period than the Ripper murders to really grip the public, and, as you suggest, the dismembering was most probably done in some private building, the body parts spread over a much larger area than the Ripper's hunting grounds. They seem to have much more of a ‘business feel’ about them, if I may put it like that.
All the best,
Frank
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2560
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 4:51 pm: |
|
Don and Frank,
Good posts there.
I agree.
Indeed, Mags,
seems like the Ripper had a better agent than the Torso Killer.
Am I wrong here (please someone enlighten me), but haven't there been a name suggested to one of the female torsos, a missing woman whom they suspected might have been identical with her? Not that her identity was proven, but anyway...?
All the best
G, Sweden
"Well, do you... punk?"
Dirty Harry, 1971
|
Frank van Oploo
Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 402
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 5:10 pm: |
|
Yes, Glenn, Elizabeth Jackson was this name. Parts of her body were found in the Thames wrapped in clothing and some of these items bore a name tape that read "L. E. Fisher". However, the body parts were identified by means of old scars as belonging to Elizabeth Jackson, a prostitute who lived in Sloan Square.
Although it is suggested that the body parts were discovered between 31 May and 25 June 1889, her death certificate give the dates as running from 4 to 10 June of that year.
All the best,
Frank
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2563
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 5:12 pm: |
|
Ah, thanks, Frank.
Elizabeth Jackson do ring a bell in my old head.
Thanks again.
All the best
G, Sweden
"Well, do you... punk?"
Dirty Harry, 1971
|
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1260
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 30, 2004 - 10:46 am: |
|
Hi Andrew
The book you are thinking of is by R. Michael Gordon, The Thames Torso Murders of Victorian London, McFarland & Co., 2002, in which Gordon advances Severin Klosowski (George Chapman) as the author of both the torso murderers and the Ripper crimes; before the appearance of that book, Gordon tapped Chapman as the Ripper in Alias Jack the Ripper, McFarland & Co., 2000, and he does it once again I understand in his latest, The American Murders of Jack the Ripper, McFarland & Co., 2003, a book I have not seen. Talk about an industry! 
Incidentally, I don't think it was just the nifty name "Jack the Ripper" that made the better-known crimes in Whitechapel so famous. The Ripper crimes were done openly on the street with no attempt at concealment, whereas the torso murderer usually secreted the body parts in canals or in the river, the removal of the head usually denoting that the killer did not want the victim identified -- something that seems to elude Mr. Gordon in his eagerness to make Chapman the killer in all these crimes. As noted above by Glenn and Frank, only one of the victims of the torso crimes was ever identified: Elizabeth Jackson. The Ripper by contrast never tried to disguise the identity of his victims.
All the best
Chris George
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 703
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 1:43 pm: |
|
Chris,
That's the book. I havn't read it. I read one of Gordon's other books, however, I think the earlier. Borrowed it from the library, so I'm not sure anymore.
Andy S. |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1540
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 2:34 pm: |
|
Andy, Chris, guys,
is it worth getting to learn more about the torso murders?
Jenni
"I wanna really really really wanna zigazig ah"
|
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 705
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 8:11 pm: |
|
Jenni,
I would say most definitely so. Even though they were probably not committed by JtR we need to know about all "sensational" murders that took place at that time and place. There are indeed similarities to the Ripper murders.
I have not read Gordon's book on the Torso murders but there is a lot of information in the Ultimate Sourcebook".
Andy S. |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2621
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 8:28 pm: |
|
Andy,
I agree, they are interesting and they are important for an understanding of the broader context.
I haven't read Gordon's book either, but as you say, there's a lot of info regarding the torso murders in the Sourcebook/Companion.
All the best
G, Sweden
"Well, do you... punk?"
Dirty Harry, 1971
|
Ben Riley
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 29, 2004 - 5:18 pm: |
|
Andy,
I think that the book you referred to is THE THAMES TORSO MURDERS OF VICTORIAN LONDON by R. Michael Gordon, published by McFarland & Company in July 2002. As I'm sure you know, Mr. Gordon was also the author of ALIAS JACK THE RIPPER: BEYOND THE USUAL WHITECHAPEL SUSPECTS.
Best wishes to all for a safe, happy New Year!
Ben |
Phil Hill
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 8:53 am: |
|
To me the "torso murders" and the Whitechapel killings reek of two different killers (almost certainly men).
Take the spread of locations where "torso" fragments were found, and the very centralised locations of "Jack's" work. If you had a place to take a girl back, then kill and butcher her in secret, why take the risk of killing on the streets?
I also don't think JtR deliberately flaunted his crimes, or wanted to show off his victims. In my view, when "out", he killed opportunistically, and just left the corpses to be found once they were of no more use to him. that, it seems to me, fits the evidence best.
Surely the "torso" murderer would have done a less amateurish job on MJK.
The key in the toro murders is, ahain just MHO, the lack of heads. I think THAT killer did NOT want his victims identified. Could this have been a man (or men) disposing of surplus personnel from the "white slave trade" or organised brothels? To know the identity of the victims might then have led the police to a particular place. Without, they hadn't a clue...
Just a view,
Phil |
Catherine Ann
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, August 28, 2005 - 10:59 am: |
|
I still find the idea of there being so many depraved killers in such a small area hard to swallow. Isn't it possible that a murderer can kill in different fashions? Perhaps he did the two types of murders in order to throw people off his scent. Had he been around today and with the forensic evidence we have, he probably would've been apprehended. I think somebody on here has already stated that the torso murders were the prime targets and the "ripper" ones used in order to disguise what was happening. The idea of two warped killers is more perturbing than the idea of one killer. |
Frank van Oploo
Chief Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 748
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 30, 2005 - 4:29 am: |
|
Hi Catherine Ann,
Like many above have said, whoever killed those women who ended up as torsos, he or they went to great pains to prevent their victims from being identified. These murders even suggest that the killer or killers had some private location to cut the victims to pieces. To me that can only mean that he or they didn’t want to get caught and took measures to try to ensure that.
You say you find the idea of there being so many depraved killers in such a small area hard to swallow. What I would find very hard to swallow is that the torso murderer would almost completely abandon his measures not to get caught just to throw the police off his scent. That doesn't make sense. In fact, as long as the victims weren’t identified, the police had no scent, so also from that viewpoint your suggestion doesn’t really make sense. By the way, the area in which the torsos and other body parts were found was much larger than the Ripper’s hunting ground.
Anyway, to me, both types of murders suggest two separate murderers at least, because we can’t be sure that one and the same person was responsible for the torso murders (although I think there’s a good chance that this was the case).
Accidentally, I know of the township of Atteridgeville, just outside Pretoria, South Africa, that had 7 serial killer cases between 1956 and 1995. Two of them ‘worked’ simultaneously during the seventies, and another two had struck at about the same time during the nineties.
All the best,
Frank
"There's gotta be a lot of reasons why I shouldn't shoot you, but right now I can't think of one."
- Clint Eastwood, in 'The Rookie' (1990)
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1826
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 30, 2005 - 8:35 am: |
|
Catherine Ann, Frank,
Re the torso murders.
To me the torso murders have hints of a gang killing rather than a single depraved (are there any other kind?) murderer.
It would be interesting to know if any 'Gangland' murders occurred during this period.
Monty
...and I said: "My name is 'Sue!' How do you do!
Now you're gonna die!!"
|
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 992
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 05, 2005 - 12:37 pm: |
|
Actually, were it not for the other Torso murders, I would consider the Pinchin Street Torso murder to be a very likely candidate for a Ripper murder. The abdominal slash is very similar to JtR's known work and it is not too much of a stretch to believe that he could have escalated from "simple" murder-mutilation to dismemberment in a year's time. However, the presence of the Whitehall mystery during the known Ripper murders argues against this. It's too hard to believe that JtR was committing his "simple" murder-muilations and also committing dismemberment murders at the same time. And it seems almost certain that the perpetrator of the Whitehall mystery was also responsible for the Pinchin Street Torso murder. That would seem to eliminate JtR.
Andy S. |
InquiringMind
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, January 07, 2006 - 3:12 am: |
|
Another possible reason for why the Ripper case has gotten so much more interest and press is the simple fact that it was (is?) solvable. The torso murders were done in such an expert manner as to assure that there was nothing to investigate or research.
As to the same man being responsible for both, just because we find it off-putting that there were multiple serial-killers in London doesn't make it any less likely to be so. The phenomenon of copy-cat killers (then and now) tells us that depraved individuals can and are found in close proximity to each other. |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
