Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Serious Reason To Include Elizabeth Jackson With The WM

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Serious Reason To Include Elizabeth Jackson With The WM

    South Wales Echo
    June 26, 1889
    ************
    To Join JTR Forums :
    Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

  • #2
    Same paper....the next article in the column :

    To Join JTR Forums :
    Contact Howard@jtrforums.com

    Comment


    • #3
      I could have forgotten of course, but this is the first time I recall a suggestion that the murder and dismemberment may have been done outdoors as well as being on the victim's home turf. Naturally, I suppose, without identity of the others there would be no way to know.

      Question:
      Were the remains of the other torso victims found to be dispersed over a wider area than Elizabeth Jackson's?
      Best Wishes,
      Cris Malone
      ______________________________________________
      "Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."

      Comment


      • #4
        I believe THE BOOK OF LISTS had Jackson on their Ripper top 10 list along with the other 9 you'd expect.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Cris Malone View Post
          I could have forgotten of course, but this is the first time I recall a suggestion that the murder and dismemberment may have been done outdoors as well as being on the victim's home turf. Naturally, I suppose, without identity of the others there would be no way to know.

          Question:
          Were the remains of the other torso victims found to be dispersed over a wider area than Elizabeth Jackson's?
          Hi Cris,
          I think it has been discussed quite a few times. Dave Gates was a supporter of the idea that Eizabeth had been killed in Battersea Park where it was claimed she 'promenaded'. She certainly slept rough of the embankment close to teh park several nights before her death, The newspapers generally mentioned that she may have been killed in the park or on a barge after being picked up on the embankment.

          Police at the time suggested all Elizabeth's remains were thrown from the Bridge next to Battersea Park and depending on the weight, were taken at different speeds by the tie in that part of the Thames.

          The nameless indignity inflicted that was reminiscent of the ripper is probably the fact that Elizabeth's uterus was removed from her body. I have seen someone claiming this may not be so recently, but I first mentioned this over ten years ago; Elizabeth's uterus was found separately, parcelled up with two flaps of flesh from her abdomen and had it's own inquest. The pelvis itself, complete with the remains of the organs cut through to remove the uterus-the lower parts of the vagina and rectum and portion of the bladder was found separately a few days after the uterus.

          Comment


          • #6
            Thank you, Debs. I figured my memory was lapsing a little. Still -- and what probably caught my notice this time around -- is the shear audacity displayed if this murder and subsequent mutilations were perpetrated outdoors in a more risky location. Because, if so, then it rivals Mitre Square in many ways. One can see what was perpetrated on Elizabeth Jackson being done where the killer had little concern for time, but there had to be some concern for discovery enough to act fast in this case. Well, anyway... fascinating...and detailed research into the torso murders may yet provide a better analysis of the more famous "Jack the Ripper" murders.

            Originally posted by Debra Arif
            ...The pelvis itself, complete with the remains of the organs cut through to remove the uterus-the lower parts of the vagina and rectum and portion of the bladder was found separately a few days after the uterus...
            The latter part has a familiar ring to it.
            Best Wishes,
            Cris Malone
            ______________________________________________
            "Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Cris Malone View Post
              Thank you, Debs. I figured my memory was lapsing a little. Still -- and what probably caught my notice this time around -- is the shear audacity displayed if this murder and subsequent mutilations were perpetrated outdoors in a more risky location. Because, if so, then it rivals Mitre Square in many ways. One can see what was perpetrated on Elizabeth Jackson being done where the killer had little concern for time, but there had to be some concern for discovery enough to act fast in this case. Well, anyway... fascinating...and detailed research into the torso murders may yet provide a better analysis of the more famous "Jack the Ripper" murders.



              The latter part has a familiar ring to it.
              Thanks Cris, we also need to take in to account the possible motives of the people who were saying that Battersea Park/the embankment was the place Elizabeth spent her last few days sleeping rough. I have a problem with the timeline, a certain witness and a reason to think that what happened after 31st May may have been fabricated, but all that aside, I still think we shouldn't rule out the fact that there was a rumour that Elizabeth's death was linked to the Whitechapel murders for one reason-her uterus was 'removed'. Like it or not.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Debra Arif View Post
                I still think we shouldn't rule out the fact that there was a rumour that Elizabeth's death was linked to the Whitechapel murders for one reason-her uterus was 'removed'. Like it or not.
                Indeed, Debs, but by the same token we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that none of the Ripper victims was dismembered. Not even so much as a finger or a hand, which would have been eminently doable if the killer of Nichols -> Kelly had felt inclined to dismember as well as to eviscerate.
                Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                "Suche Nullen"
                (F. Nietzsche)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                  Indeed, Debs, but by the same token we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that none of the Ripper victims was dismembered. Not even so much as a finger or a hand, which would have been eminently doable if the killer of Nichols -> Kelly had felt inclined to dismember as well as to eviscerate.
                  That's not what I am talking about though Gareth.
                  I am in no camp on this, I just want to get the basic truth out there. Elizabeth had her uterus removed. That's the truth. Whatever anyone else wants to argue links JTR to the so called Torso man is up to them as long as they base their theories on facts...same goes for debunking.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Ironically, it was a certain person being so adamant that flap removal from the abdomen in the cases of Annie Chapman and Mary Kelly linked them to 'JTR' that got me so interested in the fact that Elizabeth Jackson also had flaps removed from her abdomen, including the underlying subcutaneous tissue...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Debra Arif View Post
                      Ironically, it was a certain person being so adamant that flap removal from the abdomen in the cases of Annie Chapman and Mary Kelly linked them to 'JTR'...
                      I wouldn't say I was particularly "adamant" back then, Debs, although it was I who made the link, and believed it significant. Subsequently (and, I should say, long before the recent Torso discussions) I came to see the "three flaps" as being of lesser importance; indeed, I'd now argue strongly that the flaps of abdominal flesh removed from Mary Kelly were an order of magnitude different from those removed from Annie Chapman's abdomen.
                      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                      "Suche Nullen"
                      (F. Nietzsche)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                        I wouldn't say I was particularly "adamant" back then, Debs, although it was I who made the link, and believed it significant. Subsequently (and, I should say, long before the recent Torso discussions) I came to see the "three flaps" as being of lesser importance; indeed, I'd now argue strongly that the flaps of abdominal flesh removed from Mary Kelly were an order of magnitude different from those removed from Annie Chapman's abdomen.
                        Hey ho, Gareth. Maybe because it took Christer and his suspect to get something discussed that had been broached and ignored for quite a while, that is, that Elizabeth Jackson had things in common with some 'JTR' victims.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Debra Arif View Post
                          Hey ho, Gareth. Maybe because it took Christer and his suspect to get something discussed that had been broached and ignored for quite a while, that is, that Elizabeth Jackson had things in common with some 'JTR' victims.
                          Not at all. The wounds inflicted on Chapman (and, for that matter, Jackson) were materially different from those inflicted on Kelly. Not least, "three flaps" in Chapman and Kelly's case, and "two slips" in the case of Jackson.

                          There are only so many ways that one can cut into an abdomen.
                          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                          "Suche Nullen"
                          (F. Nietzsche)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                            Not at all. The wounds inflicted on Chapman (and, for that matter, Jackson) were materially different from those inflicted on Kelly. Not least, "three flaps" in Chapman and Kelly's case, and "two slips" in the case of Jackson.

                            There are only so many ways that one can cut into an abdomen.
                            But with respect, Gareth, you are being selective there. In the same report Hebbert first described the flesh (including subcutaneous tissue) taken from Elizabeth's abdomen as two 'large flaps'. In the same report he then went on to describe them further as 'long irregular slips'.
                            Of course the flap removal isn't exactly the same, and the fact that perhaps different killers were using this method of flap removal to gain better access to the abdominal cavity has been something I have been asking you about ever since you first proposed and argued persuasively that this 'flap removal' method probably showed a link between JTR's victims! I have asked you about Elizabeth's case several times in the past and didn't get an answer until now that you have decided it doesn't show a link.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Debra Arif View Post
                              Hey ho, Gareth. Maybe because it took Christer and his suspect to get something discussed that had been broached and ignored for quite a while, that is, that Elizabeth Jackson had things in common with some 'JTR' victims.


                              Hi Debs


                              More importantly, didn`t Dr Hebbert make a link between a torso and Ripper victims ?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X