Jack The Ripper Forums  - Ripperology For The 21st Century  

Go Back   Jack The Ripper Forums - Ripperology For The 21st Century > The Victims > The Pinchin Street Torso

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old April 13th, 2013, 12:25 AM   #11
Tom_Wescott
Researcher and Award Winning Author
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Tulsa, Ok. USA
Posts: 5,182
Default

[quote=Trevor Marriott] Before you get too carried away talking about murders I think you should first establish that the torsos were the subject of murders and not something else less sinister.[quote]

Hi Trevor. I was saved this work by the doctors at the time.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott
Tom_Wescott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2013, 06:51 AM   #12
Debra Arif
Sausage brain
 
Debra Arif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 8,283
Default

Here's the comparison of MJK and Jackson:

Mary Kelly-The skin and tissues of the abdomen from the costal arch to the pubes were removed in three large flaps.{ .........} the flap of skin, including the external organs of generation, and part of the right buttock. The neck was cut through the skin and other tissues right down to the vertebrae, the fifth and sixth being deeply notched


Elizabeth Jackson-The flaps of skin and subcutaneous tissue consisted of two long, irregular slips taken from the abdominal walls. The left piece included the umbilicus, the greater part of the mons veneris the left labium majus, and labium minus The right piece included the rest of the mons veneris, the right labium majus and minus[the external organs of generation], and part of the skin of the right buttock.
Head and neck taken off opposite the 6th cervical vertebra.
Debra Arif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2013, 07:27 AM   #13
Edward Stow
Researcher
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 4,005
Default

I haven’t fully gone through the pros and cons of Charles Lechmere being potentially responsible for some of the torsos as well as the Ripper murders, but he is about the only suspect who potentially could have.

The Pinchin Street connection is the key – not only did his mother live a couple of streets away, not only was she running a cat’s meat business which the family continued up until the 1930s, but Forsdike died soon after – suggesting (only suggesting) he may have been ill and possibly not at home when the Pinchin Street murder took place (presuming it was a murder of course).

Also Lechmere’s mother lived in Pinchin Street at the time of the 1881 census.
Also Charles Lechmere lived in Pinchin Street at the time of the 1861 census, when it was called Thomas Street and he was notoriously named as Charles Cross by his then living step father Thomas Cross.

The police seem to have targeted their enquiries in the Cable Street area for some reason.

Who can fathom why a serial killer does what he does and where he does it? Saying they wouldn’t do this or that or it would be sick to do such and such is somewhat besides the point.
They do.

There was a Pickfords office at Brompton Road – which some might classify as Chelsea.
There was also an office in Munster Road Fulham, one by Victoria Station, another just over the river in Vauxhall, another in Balham, near Battersea.

Looking at the unsolved murders in the London area as a whole and matching them to potential suspects, I think you have to say that there is potential for Charles Lechmere to have carried out most of the knife attacks on prostitutes that took place in the late 1880s and early 1890s.
Edward Stow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2013, 07:56 AM   #14
Trevor Marriott
Author & Researcher
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,997
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Debra Arif View Post
It was established legally in the case of two of them at their inquests.
We have argued this before "establisled legally" if you mean with regards to Elizabeth Jackson go back and read your dissertation on casebook. The verdict of wilful murder was as a result of the coroner directing the jury to return that verdict. That was against what the doctors had intimated in the first instance and then at the last minute they gave a different opinion based on no new eveidence in the interim period.

I also refer to your dissertation

Dr Bond was instantly of the opinion that the body part was that of a young woman and that an attempt had been made to carry out an illegal operation, which had been successful.

Dr Thomas Bond handed the coroner a lengthy report on the medical findings and the description of the woman was again repeated including the fact that she was pregnant by about seven to eight months and undelivered at the time of her death, the unborn child having been removed, by an incision into the uterus after the mother's death. Dr Bond went on to state that as part of the stomach was missing there was no way of knowing if the victim had been administered drugs of any kind, but he had seen no trace of instruments having been used for an unlawful purpose. The cause of death could not be determined as the head, throat, lungs and heart had never been recovered,

The Coroner then stated that was all the evidence. He remarked that this case was somewhat different to the cases that had unfortunately occurred in Whitechapel. This was a case in which a woman had died under circumstances that in themselves were excessively suspicious. He went on to say that everything on the body pointed to the conclusion that the body was that of Elizabeth Jackson and suggested to the jury that a verdict of wilful murder, by some person or persons unknown should be returned.

Now after all of that how you can say for certain that her death was murder amazes me. If she was murdered in the park as someone suggested why would the killer simply not leave her body at the scene.

If yoyu cannot determine a casue of death the correct verdict should have been "found dead" !

Rainham Torso

From another reserachers dissertation

In May of 1887, in the Thames River Valley village of Rainham, when workers pulled from the river a bundle containing the torso of a female. Throughout May and June, numerous parts from the same body showed up in various parts of London -until a complete body, minus head and upper chest, was reconstructed.

Medical men, including Police Surgeon Dr. Thomas Bond, gave their opinion that a degree of medical knowledge was evident, however, in their view, the body was no dissected for medical purposes. The doctors could not give a cause of death or show that a violent act had taken place, so the jury returned a verdict of "found dead"

Whitehall Mystery

The medical men involved, along with Dr. Bond, agreed that a degree of medical knowledge had been used, but they could give no evidence pointing to the method of death. Dr. Charles Hibbert, who examined one of the arms, stated that, "I thought the arm was cut off by a person who, while he was not necessarily an anatomist, certainly knew what he was doing-who knew where the joints were and cut them pretty regularly." At the inquest, the jury, despite the fact that an obvious murder had taken place, returned a verdict of "Found Dead."

So for you and others to publicly state that these were murders is wrong they are nothing more than "Suspicious deaths" and plausible explanations can be put forward which could negate the wilful murder suggestion.
Trevor Marriott is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2013, 07:58 AM   #15
Trevor Marriott
Author & Researcher
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,997
Default

[QUOTE=Tom_Wescott;198705][quote=Trevor Marriott] Before you get too carried away talking about murders I think you should first establish that the torsos were the subject of murders and not something else less sinister.
Quote:

Hi Trevor. I was saved this work by the doctors at the time.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott
Well then you obvioulsy didnet read the report thoroughly or were not able to assess and evaluate them correctly.
Trevor Marriott is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2013, 09:14 AM   #16
Debra Arif
Sausage brain
 
Debra Arif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 8,283
Default

Pinchin Street- The jury at once returned a verdict of "Wilful murder against some person or persons unknown."


Elizabeth Jackson-the coroner suggested to the jury that a verdict of wilful murder, by some person or persons unknown should be returned. A verdict in accordance with the coroner's direction was reached and the jury complemented the police engaged on the case on their vigilance and the ability they had shown in bringing the matter to an issue.

Drs Hebbert and Bond made a first hand detailed examination of all the remains involved in these four torso cases. Bond had also worked on other similar cases in the 1870s so was in a position to make comparison between these four torso cases and previous cases of a similar nature. Bond and Hebbert's detailed autopsy examinations of all four cases still exist-one set in a medical jurisprudence text book and the other set as two lectures given by Hebbert based on those autopsies and were given as lectures to students at the Westminster Hospital where Hebbert and Bond both lectured in forensics.

It is down on record and I also mention it later in the piece Trevor is quoting me from, that Bond's conclusions on the Elizabeth Jackson cases changed when it was determined without a doubt that Elizabeth's uterus was removed from her body after death and that he foetus was then removed from the uterus. Initially the statement about abortion had been made when a parcel containing only an empty uterus, umbilical cord and flaps of abdominal skin was the first thing to be retrieved from the Thames and a post mortem on all the remains had not yet been carried out. As I keep telling Trevor over and over-anyone reading the detailed descriptions of Elizabeth's organs of generation will see Bond went to great trouble to examine the birth canal and areas that usually show the tell tale signs of abortion being atempted and there were none.

We've had this same old argument over and over-his official conclusion was that no abortion had been attempted.
Bond and Hebbert's autopsy notes from all four cases are official and the most detailed descriptions of the torsos that we have. Their opinion was that a slaughterer or horse knacker was responsible or someone accustomed to cutting up animals. None of the body parts had been injected in the veins with fluid used when body parts are used as medical specimens and the appearance of skin created at the tops of the arms etc after removal. was not the way a medial man would do it.
The other dissertation is quoting newspaper articles and not these autopsy notes.
Debra Arif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2013, 09:20 AM   #17
Debra Arif
Sausage brain
 
Debra Arif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 8,283
Default

Would they have used venetian blind cord for any purpose at Pickford's?
Debra Arif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2013, 09:46 AM   #18
Trevor Marriott
Author & Researcher
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,997
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Debra Arif View Post
Pinchin Street- The jury at once returned a verdict of "Wilful murder against some person or persons unknown."


Elizabeth Jackson-the coroner suggested to the jury that a verdict of wilful murder, by some person or persons unknown should be returned. A verdict in accordance with the coroner's direction was reached and the jury complemented the police engaged on the case on their vigilance and the ability they had shown in bringing the matter to an issue.

Drs Hebbert and Bond made a first hand detailed examination of all the remains involved in these four torso cases. Bond had also worked on other similar cases in the 1870s so was in a position to make comparison between these four torso cases and previous cases of a similar nature. Bond and Hebbert's detailed autopsy examinations of all four cases still exist-one set in a medical jurisprudence text book and the other set as two lectures given by Hebbert based on those autopsies and were given as lectures to students at the Westminster Hospital where Hebbert and Bond both lectured in forensics.

It is down on record and I also mention it later in the piece Trevor is quoting me from, that Bond's conclusions on the Elizabeth Jackson cases changed when it was determined without a doubt that Elizabeth's uterus was removed from her body after death and that he foetus was then removed from the uterus. Initially the statement about abortion had been made when a parcel containing only an empty uterus, umbilical cord and flaps of abdominal skin was the first thing to be retrieved from the Thames and a post mortem on all the remains had not yet been carried out. As I keep telling Trevor over and over-anyone reading the detailed descriptions of Elizabeth's organs of generation will see Bond went to great trouble to examine the birth canal and areas that usually show the tell tale signs of abortion being atempted and there were none.

We've had this same old argument over and over-his official conclusion was that no abortion had been attempted.
Bond and Hebbert's autopsy notes from all four cases are official and the most detailed descriptions of the torsos that we have. Their opinion was that a slaughterer or horse knacker was responsible or someone accustomed to cutting up animals. None of the body parts had been injected in the veins with fluid used when body parts are used as medical specimens and the appearance of skin created at the tops of the arms etc after removal. was not the way a medial man would do it.
The other dissertation is quoting newspaper articles and not these autopsy notes.
The doctors no doubt gave their opinions based on their own individual level of surgical skills. Not everyone in the medical profession would have been able to perform the same level of skill as those doctors thats why organs and bodies etc were in demand to enable medical personell the opportunity to develop their skills. .

I also have to ask how can a doctor give an opinion with regards to how a horseslaughter would have gone about carrying out surgical procedures on a human. Its ridiculous to accept those opinions.
Trevor Marriott is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2013, 10:17 AM   #19
Edward Stow
Researcher
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 4,005
Default

Would they have used venetian blind cord for any purpose at Pickford's?

They used a special venetian blind cord manufactured off Poplar High Street and it was used excelusively at their Broad Street depot for wrapping parcels of meat.

Or not.
Edward Stow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 13th, 2013, 10:54 AM   #20
Monty
---- ---
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,364
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
The doctors no doubt gave their opinions based on their own individual level of surgical skills. Not everyone in the medical profession would have been able to perform the same level of skill as those doctors thats why organs and bodies etc were in demand to enable medical personell the opportunity to develop their skills. .

I also have to ask how can a doctor give an opinion with regards to how a horseslaughter would have gone about carrying out surgical procedures on a human. Its ridiculous to accept those opinions.
A staggering statement.

How can a policeman give opnion on medical matters?....if we are playing that game.

Monty
Monty is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10 Beta 2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright @ Howard & Nina Brown 2015-2022