Elizabeth Jackson

[A.P. Wolf]

I found the following on one of them black magic sites, and just wondered whether anyone had more information on this dubious connection:

‘On September 10, 1889, Police Constable Pennett discovered a woman's torso, missing the head and legs, under a railway bridge on Pinchin Street. The date of death was approximately September 8, the anniversary of Annie Chapman's murder. The woman was thought to be a missing East End prostitute named Lydia Hart, but this was never proven. Although dismissed as a Ripper murder by the police, "The general conclusion, then and since, has been that this torso murder was in some way connected with the Whitehall Mystery." [5]
This indicates a third killer in London at the same time as the two Rippers, a sort of Torso slayer. There seems to be no reason to connect this third killer to the first two, but one name strings them eerily together: A woman named Margaret told of seeing Mary Jane Kelly on the night before her murder, but investigation showed that she had actually mistaken one Lizzie Fisher for Kelly. Catharine Eddowes, murdered and mutilated on September 30, had a sister named Elizabeth Fisher.
And the undergarments wrapped around the left thigh and leg of Elizabeth Jackson had a name stenciled on them: "L. E. Fisher". ‘


[thanks for the above,A.P.]

[admin tim]

Dear A.P.

If you could at your leisure, please let me know if you can list the entire list of both prostitute murders in 1888....and the three Torso Murders of 88-89....here on this thread. I will delete this post if you wish to placate them.

Also,for the sake of others, if you would....please list the unsolved ones and I will emboldened the type on them for all to see.

Thanks !

[A.P. Wolf]

Ah, How, I think I understand what you mean.
So by all means... placate, placate, delete, delete.
I'll slaughter this chicken and examine its entrails elsewhere.

[Debra Arif]

I've bumped up this thread as I am very interested in others thoughts on whether Elizabeth Jackson could have been a victim of JTR or not, and if not who?
I think there are probably three distinct theories on her murder, some may be a mix and match of these theories but I think these are the main ideas:

a) That she was a victim of Jack the Ripper as put forward by modern authors such as R. Michael Gordon and also in the 1935 Life and death at the Old Bailey book by R. Thurston Hopkins
Herbert Jenkins.
b) That she was a victim of a second serial killer in operation at the same time as JTR and who was responsible for the Rainham, Whitehall and Pinchin St torso murders, as per Macnaghten and his 'on all fours' comment.
c) That she was the one off victim of a killer or abortionist and the dismemberment of her body was to conceal her identity and destroy a link to the individual responsible.

I noticed that although Jenkins puts forward the idea that Elizabeth could have been a victim of Jack most of his details (and errors) about her case seem to have been directly lifted from Macnaghtens writings in Days of My Years, both of them seemingly wanting to place some suspicion on a medical man or student when they mention the white medical gauze or the 'curious piece of white cloth, such as is used by certain students engaged on a particular kind of work.' A mistaken observation as far as I can tell as the only white cloth mentioned in the case reports is the undergarment marked L.E. Fisher that some portions of the body were found wrapped in.

Has anyone got any ideas on this?

A gruesome but also interesting aspect of the murder, for me, is the removal of a seven month old foetus from a 5 inch long incision made in Elizabeth's womb after her death, the cord being cut and the placenta and rest of the cord then left in the womb. Also, Elizabeth's intestines were stated to have been 'removed' in the medical reports. I realise that many of her internal organs would have been displaced during this horrific butchery, but they do state removed and not just missing.

[Debra Arif]

I'm just posting this newspaper reports I've come across recently concerning the idea of Elizabeth Jackson being a victim of JTR. There are various other reports in different newspapers also suggesting the same idea.

I am curious about the 'nameless indignity' inflicted upon Elizabeth's corpse that led them to suspect the handiwork of Jack.

3510

[A.P. Wolf]

I think you do well to pursue this case, Debs, as it is one that has fascinated me for a long while now; and there certainly seemed to be a strong body of opinion around at the time that the crime was linked to the Whitechapel Murders.
What I do find interesting though is that the victim might well have not been Elizabeth Jackson, for two years before a 'Elizabeth Jackson' - I'm not sure if it is the same one but somehow I think so - in the same general area was robbed of most of her clothes by another 'unfortunate'; and as the identification of the victim in the 'Thames Mystery' was almost based solely on her clothing I think this issue might raise some doubts about the identification of the victim.

[Debra Arif]

Hi AP
Elizabeth's identity was actually confirmed by a scar on her wrist, caused during a childhood accident. This, added to the identification of the clothing she was wearing (incidentally, one of these items of clothing had been purchased for her, by her then partner Faircloth, only two months previously). Also, she was last seen the day before the discovery of the body in the Thames, which had only been in the water 24 hours or so. She was known to have been in the later stages of pregnancy (as had been the victim) and had also been sleeping rough on the Thames embankment a few nights before her murder. The colouring of her hair, age, stature etc were all taken into account too.
I think all weighed up, there wouldn't have been much doubt about the identification, her family were certainly in agreement.

[A.P. Wolf]

Agreed, Debs, but wasn't it Bond who used the scar as the identifying tool?
I don't trust Bond, as you know.
As this Elizabeth Jackson also appears to have lost her younger sister - to death I mean - in very mysterious circumstances a couple of years before the 'Thames Mystery' I do think your endeavours in this regard are worthy.

[Debra Arif]

Dr Hebbert also had input into this case, as did Dr Kempster who had been involved with a similar torso find previously.
While Bond stated in the papers that the foetus found in a pickle jar in the Thames was certainly nothing to do with the Jackson case, Kempster was a bit more cautious with his opinion and said it couldn't be ruled out for certain that it wasn't the unborn child of Elizabeth, removed from her womb after death.
I'm not familiar with the younger sister death AP, can you give me more details, thanks.

[A.P. Wolf]

This is the report that caught my roving eye, Debs, from the 'Illustrated Police News', January 16th 1886, the robbery of Liz's clothes followed shortly after:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/liz1.jpg

[Debra Arif]

Thanks for that AP, this one is a different Jackson family though, they lived in the Strand area and were in the same Wilson St address in 1881. The Elizabeth Jackson identified as the torso victim was from the Chelsea area of London and in 1881 she was in service in Chelsea. Her father was still alive and in the Chelsea workhouse at the time of her death in 1889.

[A.P. Wolf]

Just like testing the water, Debs.
More power to your elbow.

[Debra Arif]

I know a lot of us are familiar with this medical jurisprudence book but I thought it may be worth posting the section dealing with the Elizabeth Jackson torso find for those who don't have access to the book.

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/elizabeth20jackson201.jpg

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/elizabeth20jackson202.jpg

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/elizabeth20jackson203.jpg

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/elizabeth20jackson204.jpg

[Debra Arif]

AP, as there's only ever you and me on this thread I thought you may be interested to know that I've finally found out what the 'nameless indignity' inflicted on Elizabeth's body, mentioned in my earlier post as a fact being supressed by the press, could be refering to.
How it suggests a link to Whitechapel murders I have no clue. Anyway, I have written up an account of Elizabeth's murder including this finding and given it to Stephen to post on the dissertations section of casebook, hopefully it will be of interest to some.

Debs

[A.P. Wolf]

Damn right I'm interested, Debs, I've always viewed this case as pivotal to our modern thinking on the Whitechapel Murders, so I can't wait to see your thoughts on the subject... and thanks for those easy links, saves me a lot of time.

[Debra Arif]

Thanks AP,
Although I've confined my thoughts on the subject to part 2 (which I am still writing)
I've stuck to an account of the findings of the body and the press stories surrounding it for the first one.

[A.P. Wolf]

Debs, I'll reply to you here, as I am unable to on Casebook.
The points made about burial at sea are not really relevant as they concern the efforts made at sea when a person has died and one wants to get their body back to the nearest landfall without a lot of mess, rather than an actual burial at sea where it doesn't really matter what effluent is passed.
I think we discuss a very delicate situation here, which I never enjoy, that depends on how we view the working prostitutes of the LVP, in that certain methods were employed by these girls to ensure that they didn't fall for Oscar's random habit of using the back door when there was a perfectly respectable front door for him to walk through.
Although the front door was always open, the back door had a price.
I'm sorry if this is crude, but the system is still in use today.

[Debra Arif]

Thanks very much for this interesting piece of information AP, it isn't a very nice subject to discuss, but I did also look for answers about the 'finding' along similar lines but came up with nothing, and the papers made a big deal about it being some familiar practice connected to mariners, I was thinking if it was something associated with prostitution they would also be familiar with it in that context too and could have reported it as such without going in to actual detail either, but I suppose it was considered even more of a delicate subject then than it is now.

[A.P. Wolf]

Exactly Debs.
'nameless indignity' was the term used for the rape of European women by American Indians in the Victorian Period; and also by the Pall Mall Gazette in the LVP for homosexual acts.
What is of particular interest to me is that the Elizabeth Jackson case does appear to suggest that some intimate - and perhaps very sordid - material relating to the Whitechapel Murders was never released in a public manner, but was known to a few in the 'know'.
This, then being, an idea floated after the murder of Jackson.

[Debra Arif]

Ap, I thought exactly the same thing when I discovered this in the press, for me it gave Elizabeth's murder a much more sordid aspect to it, and disturbed me more than a little.
I did run the idea of this aspect being the 'nameless idignity' that was supressed in the press past a couple of others and asked around as to if there could have been something similar in other Whitechapel cases that went intentionally unreported, I originally wrote the piece with this idea in mind, having the same sort of thing in mind that you have....however, I also realised afterwards that the details of the removal of Elizabeth's womb, flaps of skin from her abdomen and removal of a foetus also went unreported, we only have the details now because of the System of Legal Medicine book, nowhere are these full details reported in the press. Looking up the legal definitions of a 'nameless indignity' I found that in legal terms it also refers to the removal of organs or mutilation of a dead body and so concluded that the nameless indignity that linked Elizabeth to Jack, mentioned by the press, could also be referring to this piece of evidence, as Jack was known to remove organs, wombs in particular.

[Debra Arif]

What also swayed me that the reference was to the mutilations, was that in one report of Annie Chapman's murder (I haven't the notes with me at the moment) her mutilations were also refered to as a nameless indignity inflicted upon her body.

[A.P. Wolf]

Debs, I have not seen that reference myself so I'll see if I can't find it.
It may seem strange for me to say it, but I do not find the mutilating injuries that Elizabeth Jackson suffered to have been unusual for that time period; but I do find the 'curious piece of white cloth' incident to be of compelling interest.
I have attempted to register on Casebook, to be able to respond to your excellent article, but without success.
Perhaps they don't want me on the case?

[A.P. Wolf]

Debs, the quote is from the 'Daily News' of 10th September 1888:

'In that time the murderer had decoyed the woman into the house, slain her in the yard, robbed her of her sham rings, inflicted nameless indignities on the dead body, indignity upon indignity, horror upon horror, and got clean away.'

[Debra Arif]

That's the one AP, thanks, I knew the wording was slightly different.


It may seem strange for me to say it, but I do not find the mutilating injuries that Elizabeth Jackson suffered to have been unusual for that time period


Really?

[A.P. Wolf]

Yes, Debs, really, but this is based on a case which I have now lost, due to the collapse of Casebook where I had it posted. I think the case was actually from 1888, but I'm not sure now... it involved a young girl who wasn't even pregnant but was virtually ripped to pieces by some quack abortionist of the time. And a lot of other incidents, which I really must recall.
A lot of women went into the water in those days, and most were termed suicides by the doctors, but when a man went into the water under exactly the same circumstances then by god it was murder.
I recently found a case from the period where the woman was beaten, thrown in the river, and then the local watchmen came along, found it was a woman and went to his local pub while she drowned, because he thought she was a suicide.

[Debra Arif]

As part of looking at this case I inevitably ended up looking at scores of cases of abortion and have come across many horrific accounts of internal organs being ripped/torn out vaginally during the process of bringing on an abortion on women very much alive at the time. Victorian abortion invariably involved poisons or instrument use, sometimes both, and patients rarely died instantly but mostly several days or weeks later from blood poisoning and other such infections.
Jackson to me is different , never have I come across an abortionist who incised a womb after death to remove a foetus...what would be the point? Maybe someone was attempting to bring about an abortion (although I wonder who payed for this costly operation as she was destitute) and maybe she died before it commenced, but why would an abortionist go on to remove the foetus...concelament of the crime? Then why leave the evidence in the form of a uterus complete with cord and placenta? From checking the press extensively it seems abortionist who caused the death of patients very rarely faced the death penalty anyway, 15 years penal servitude seems about the norm.
Jackson's uterus was removed after death by a long sweeping cut from a knife,and purposefully it seems.

A lot of women went into the water in those days, yes, but not many with mutilations and disarticulations of joints etc within a short space of a couple of years.

[Debra Arif]

There is one case I did come across involving an abortionist cutting up a body after the patient had died and dumping it in a river to avoid detection.
The Yellow Pond tradgedy at Bridgeport, Connecticut 1898, the abortionist being a Dr Nancy Guilford who fled to London shortly after the crime where she was captured and appeared at Bow Street Magistrates Court where steps were put in place taken to extradite her back to the US.

The circumstances were different in that case though, in that the victim was the girlfriend of a rich and influential married man and he had sought out Dr Guilford to perform the abortion, reputations were very much at stake and many people were implicated in the crime, there was a lot to cover up. Four people were eventually charged and convicted with being involved in the case, Guilford herself only got 10 years for manslaughter.

Elizabeth Jackson was a homeless, destitute prositute.

[Stan Reid]

This week is the centivigintennial of the first finds of Elizabeth Jackson's remains. The recovery ranged over several days.