Pinching the "Canon" fuse

[caz]

I think you'll find that Perry can usually speak up for himself, Lynn. And I'm not so sure your references to works of fiction are designed to help him.

It really doesn't matter how many wombs Perry's ghoul was commissioned to extract out on the teeming streets of Whitechapel, since he would still fit the definition of a violent male-on-female repeat offender, even if he totally failed in the first mission and succeeded in the second, never to attack another woman in his life.

Oh this is getting too silly to counter. I'll leave you to defend Perry Mason (our fictional detective) in your own way. You may need a new incarnation as Della Street.

Love,

Caz
X

[lynn cates]

Hello Caz. Your dictum:

"he would still fit the definition of a violent male-on-female repeat offender"

could not be more accurate. My dictum:

" 'angin's too good for 'im ah says."

Regarding Perry Mason. His helper was indeed Della Street. And who was his nemesis? (Couldn't resist.)

Cheers.
LC

[perrymason]

Ive actually never have said that I personally believe the uterus story given by Wynne Baxter during his Nichols summation is what we all should accept as the ONLY acceptable premise or even the most likely premise for the murder of the first 2 Canonicals. I have said consistently that it is a real story that is at the heart of the theory and that it was offered by the men charged with the determination of whether Polly and Annie were murdered...and possibly if the physical evidence suggests a possible motive, to then offer that.

Which he..... and since Phillips comments assist him with this speculation of his....they did.

Many people ignore or disregard what was suggested. I personally dont see reasons to arbitrarily toss aside an opinion of a contemporary investigator who has had benefit of viewing or discussing with the physician who did inspect the deceased's wounds, the specific nature of the wounds inflicted.

Not being a doctor I have no grounds to overrule their opinions... as some here do anyway, and just like Bond without the benefit of actually seeing 4 of the women himself......but to my untrained eye it seems acceptable that they might suggest this theory for the killer who murdered Annie at least, because there are few cuts on her body that would not have had to happen to enable the uterus theft. Almost every cut can be explained based on that premise, from the throat cut on.

What again is the explanation for the removal of thigh flesh in connection with the obtaining of a heart?

I must have missed that logical progression in there somewhere that people seem to think is present.

Best regards all

[Sam Flynn]

Originally Posted by perrymason

Ive actually never have said that I personally believe the uterus story given by Wynne Baxter during his Nichols summation is what we all should accept as the ONLY acceptable premise or even the most likely premise for the murder of the first 2 Canonicals. I have said consistently that it is a real story that is at the heart of the theory and that it was offered by the men charged with the determination of whether Polly and Annie were murdered

Correction, Mike - it was offered by ONE man, Wynne Baxter, and he used the story to humiliate Dr Bagster Phillips. That upstart doctor had had the cheek to question the Great Baxter's wisdom in insisting that the gory details be given out at the inquest, details which were subsequently suppressed by the press.

That latter point makes Baxter's claim rather interesting. I paraphrase, but the gist of it goes:

"How dare people [by implication the hapless Dr Bagster Phillips] suggest that I was wrong to ask for the gory details to be given at my inquests. It just so happens [by an amazing coincidence] that I was vindicated straight away. I was contacted by an official of one of our great medical institutions, who had read all about Chapman's evisceration in the paper. I [personally, natch] went to meet him, and he informed me that [insert account of "Womb-Man's Weekly" magazine here]...".

What puzzles me is how Baxter's curator chum got to read about Annie's hysterectomy, if this detail was omitted by the mainstream press - yet Baxter claims his correspondent read about it in the morning papers. I smell a rat.

[caz]

Hi Perry,

What's so difficult about this? The wounds to Polly and Annie were merely found to be consistent with an attempt by the killer to extract the womb from their dead bodies.

That's it.

End of.

After that, the best guesses of the finest medical or non-medical brains in the land, as to the killer's motivation for leaving the bodies in the condition in which they were shortly found, were no better or worse than anyone else's, including yours or mine today.

There is not a shred of evidence to indicate one potential use for the organs over any other. We are not dealing with a logical killer here - especially if he thought it a useful little earner to do what he did to Polly and Annie.

But we can surely use some common sense here to rule out some kind of demented Uncle Jack figure, desperately keen to help women overcome their fertility problems - by studying the menopausal wombs ripped from hurriedly slaughtered unfortunates.

This was just over a hundred years ago, Perry, not a thousand. My grandparents were ten in 1888.

Love,

Caz
X

[perrymason]

Caz, Sam........my point was never that they were obviously intended to be given to an American Doctor that asked to buy some uteri the year before...my point was that the story offers a possible explanation of why anyone would kill for that specific organ.

I can and do think of other reasons.

Tumblety was a long forgotten but well known man to the investigators at the time, he was nuts and dangerously so.....he is also too tall to reconcile with any witness sightings.

I can see possibly a few different stories for some of these murders that involve men we know about now....maybe Kosminski as Strides killer, maybe Bury or someone like him for Martha's, .......but the guy who killed the first 2 Canonical women seemed to the investigators, coroner and physician, to have done so in order for him to cut into the dead bodies and extract their uterus. The targetted organ in Annies case is obvious, the case for the same man in Pollys killing relies on the physical and circumstantial data...they were killed almost identically, and both murders had injuries that are consistent with the final outcome objective that is accomplished in only the second murder.

Ive never said these had to be kills for an American Doctor,.....only that the story for the basis of the theory was accurate, and it is one explanation that also might involve a known nut in the area at the time that had no great fondness for women,.... alive or dead I would imagine.....and who is considered to be a possible suspect for all the Ripper slayings.

My best regards