Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by cobalt 9 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: A theory about some injuries! - by Fisherman 9 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by RockySullivan 10 hours ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by cobalt 10 hours ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by cobalt 10 hours ago.
Conferences and Meetings: American Jack the Ripper - True Crime Conference, Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018 - by ChrisGeorge 13 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (11 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: A theory about some injuries! - (10 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (8 posts)
Witnesses: Why doubt a soldier murdered Tabram? - (6 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Centenaries - whole and half - (2 posts)
Audio -- Visual: Mention of JtR in recent episode of "The Flash" - (2 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Victims > Mary Ann Nichols

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #181  
Old 07-17-2017, 08:13 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
What was normal about Millers Court?
Yes of course that's a reasonable point but what I'm saying is that bearing in mind that the normal procedure is for an in-situ examination followed by a post-mortem examination in the mortuary can we be absolutely sure that this is not what happened at Miller's Court?

If you think we can be sure, then how?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #182  
Old 07-17-2017, 08:17 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Most dead bodies do not need to be put back together before they are moved to the mortuary. That process seemed to involve several medical professionals who no doubt were interested in the how & why these organs were removed.

Why can't you think that through yourself?
There's just no need for that kind of comment Jon.

What I'm wondering is whether the main aim of the doctors on the afternoon of 9 November was to establish whether any organs had been removed and, if so, what organs. That was specifically to assist the police in their investigation. And then the proper post-mortem examination - where notes were taken in the normal manner - was conducted the next morning at the mortuary.

I fail to see why this is not a reasonable suggestion, and one worthy of consideration. Just because some newspapers said something different is surely not a reason to discard it.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #183  
Old 07-17-2017, 09:04 AM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,117
Default

I believe that it was reported that Marys remains were placed in a small wooden box when they were removed from the room, and that a "Volte Face" was done Saturday. I don't think the objective in the room was to identify each extracted organ to ensure all were there, just to catalogue what was where and the condition, and position, of the corpse. The photos we have don't seem to direct attention to the various materials between Marys legs, or even on the table, but the photo we do have apparently had glass negatives that indicated that the glass slides were numbered "of" 6. One of those would I assume been taken from the foot of the bed, to go with the right side, left side ones that we have today..
__________________
Michael Richards
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #184  
Old 07-17-2017, 10:53 AM
John G John G is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,079
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Ah, so Phillips didn't give an opinion then?
Sorry, I thought you said he did.

It appears Phillips was consistent in his dealings with the press - no comment!

The only legitimate opinion we receive from Phillips is his inquest testimony. He described the room & the body after he entered on that Friday afternoon.
After a cursory (preliminary?) examination he determined she had died from a cut to the throat. That is all we know from Phillips's own mouth, isn't it?
Yes, which means we're left with Dr Bond's opinion that Kelly's murderer demonstrated no skill whatsoever. Dr Phillips clearly does not contradict him in respect of Kelly, therefore I think Dr Bond's conclusions should be accepted.

I, of course, accept that Dr Bond also considered that no skill had been demonstrated in any of the other C5 victims, however, not only is he contradicted in this regard but he was not present at the Post mortems. Therefore, in respect of the other C5 victims, his opinion should be treated with caution.

Last edited by John G : 07-17-2017 at 10:57 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #185  
Old 07-17-2017, 11:09 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,824
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
hi Wickerman
how does the autopsy taking place in Millers court help your well dressed man theory?
No idea, do you see connection?
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #186  
Old 07-17-2017, 11:24 AM
Wickerman Wickerman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,824
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Well at least you now seem to understand what I have been saying the whole time.
I was clarifying my position, not yours.

Quote:
You can't just swipe it away with your hand and say "time consuming". You do need to qualify your statements with "I think" or "I believe" or "according to" or whatever. Anything else is poor form. Of course, there are footnotes in books. But not in posts.
These quotes have been posted so many times, on so many different threads, they may begin to write themselves if we are not careful.
I referred to nothing that was not common knowledge among the frequent flyers on Casebook. Maybe I was mistaken to think you were familiar enough with where the activity of Dr Philips is recorded.

Quote:
It can be very intimidating when someone makes unqualified statements as if they were established facts on the boards.
Then why didn't you just ask?

Quote:
In response, in a post addressed to me, you said this:

"Dr. Phillips did make a preliminary examination on entering the room at 1:30, after which the photographer appears to have been permitted to enter, prior to the post-mortem beginning at 2:00 pm."
Precisely, because in his inquest testimony he says just that, after entering the room he made an examination.
Then in the press his role is elaborated by admitting the photographer, prior to the post-mortem accompanied by his peers.
There is nothing there to change.


Quote:
Finally, and I hope this really is final, I note that in on 15 January 2016, on JTR Forums, after referring to the "legally bound autopsy" conducted on the Saturday morning, you posted this:

"However, there were two previous examinations, if we can trust the press."


I don't know how "if we can trust the press" has, in 17 months, become "we CAN trust the press". You got it right in JTR Forums so why not get in right in here?
Then you knew my position all along, yet you choose not to ask if my source was the press.
That reads to me as being intentionally confrontational, as you were aware of what I had wrote on the subject before.

(What did I say about following me around?)

You have embarked on a wild goose chase, which can only be for your own amusement.
__________________
Regards, Jon S.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #187  
Old 07-17-2017, 11:32 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
These quotes have been posted so many times, on so many different threads, they may begin to write themselves if we are not careful.
I referred to nothing that was not common knowledge among the frequent flyers on Casebook. Maybe I was mistaken to think you were familiar enough with where the activity of Dr Philips is recorded.
You were, indeed, so mistaken.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #188  
Old 07-17-2017, 11:34 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Then why didn't you just ask?
I did ask but I shouldn't have had to. Had you written it correctly in the first place I might not even have replied at all and we wouldn't have needed a 100 post discussion about it.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #189  
Old 07-17-2017, 11:36 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Precisely, because in his inquest testimony he says just that, after entering the room he made an examination.
But you are wrong! He simply does not say that. He does not say "After entering the room I made an examination". On the contrary, he speaks about entering the room then refers to his "subsequent examination".

It's one thing to form your own interpretation but another to misrepresent the evidence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Then in the press his role is elaborated by admitting the photographer, prior to the post-mortem accompanied by his peers.
There is nothing there to change.
How long do you think it would have taken the photographer to take six photographs of the interior from different angles incidentally?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #190  
Old 07-17-2017, 11:41 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
Then you knew my position all along, yet you choose not to ask if my source was the press.
Absolutely not! I only did the search today after your mention of the word the word "autopsy" yesterday.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
That reads to me as being intentionally confrontational, as you were aware of what I had wrote on the subject before.
So now you know you read it wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
(What did I say about following me around?)
You said something that was untrue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman View Post
You have embarked on a wild goose chase, which can only be for your own amusement.
Not at all. You don't seem to be au fait with proper academic standards. You cut out sections of text without making clear that you have done so and you repeatedly state assumptions as fact. I'm trying to help you here. I know it's only an internet forum but we should try and keep standards as high as possible don't you think?
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.